Lakhan Soni Vs State of Chhattisgarh

This is the first bail application iled under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested on 21.05.2022 in connection with Crime No. 176/2017 registered at Police Station- Tilda Newra, DistrictRaipur (C.G.), for the ofences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 34 of IPC and Sections 4, 5 and 6 of Price Chit Fund and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 and Section 10 of Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005.

¶16

The case of the prosecution in brief is that the applicant, as the Formal Director of Nirmal Infra Home Corporation Limited, accepted deposits from various customers under recurring/fixed deposit schemes and bond schemes, but failed to return the amounts as promised. Since the company was not authorized by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) or the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to conduct such business, offences were committed under Sections 420, 409, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 4, 5, and 6 of the Prize Chit Funds

¶17

Digitally signed by ARUN ARUN KUMAR KUMAR DEWANGAN DEWANGAN Date: 2025.01.24 12:17:04 +0530

¶18

2

¶19

and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, and Section 10 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors' Interest Act, 2005.

¶20

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that the present applicant has 08 criminal antecedents and co-accused person namely Prabal Pratap Singh Yadav, has already granted bail by this Court vide order dated 22.08.2024 in MCRC No. 4794/2024. He would further submit that the applicant has also been granted bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 02.01.2025, 06.01.2025, 10.01.2025, 10.01.2025, 10.01.2025 in MCRC No. 9034/2024, MCRC No. 9020/2024, MCRC No. 212/2025, MCRC No. 198/2025 & MCRC No. 225/2024 respectively. He would further submit that the applicant is in jail since 21.05.2022 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant.

¶21

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposing the bail application would submit that there is sufficient material on record to show involvement of the applicant in the crime in question and would pray for rejection of the bail application.

¶22

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶23

Considering the fact that co-accused namely Prabal Pratap Singh Yadav, has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 22.08.2024 in MCRC No. 4794/2024, the applicant has also been granted bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, he is in jail since 21.05.2022, looking to the period of detention of the present applicant, this Court is of the view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶24

Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶25

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to

¶26

3

¶27

treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶28

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

¶29

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

¶30

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶31

Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Certified copy as per rules.

¶32

Sd/(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge

¶33

Arun

Lakhan Soni v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lakhan Soni v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramchandra Rath Vs P. Reddeyya

Shubham Sinha Vs the Honble High Court of Chhattisgarh

Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd., Vs Md. Anavrul Haq

Sunil Paikara Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Premichand Sahu Vs Dhanmantri Sahu @ Dhawantri Sahu

Dileep Kumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh