Dismissed

Smt. Minti Mandal v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC15 Sept 2026MCRC/8254/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed the eighth bail application filed by Smt. Minti Mandal under Section 483 BNSS, 2023. She was arrested in Crime No. 116/2023 for offences under Sections 409, 420/34 IPC and Sections 6(5) & 10 of the C.G.P.D.I. Act, 2005, for allegedly collecting about Rs. 1 Crore from villagers through Biva Nidhi Limited Company and transferring huge amounts to her account. The court considered seven prior bail applications (rejected on merits or withdrawn), the serious nature of allegations, and the absence of new grounds, and found the application not fit for grant of bail.

What the court decided

AI extract

Smt. Minti Mandal Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheating and Forgery | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

NAFR

CGHC010342802026

2026:CGHC:40481

VAIBHAV SINGH

Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.09.21 11:00:33 +0530

¶7

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶8

MCRC No. 8254 of 2026

¶9

Smt. Minti Mandal Wife Of Prashant Mandal Aged About 33 Years Resident Of P. V. - 116, Pakhanjore, Tahsil- Pakhanjore, District - North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ... Applicant

¶10

Versus

¶11

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Pakhanjore, District - North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant

¶12

For Applicant : Ms. Itu Rani Mukharji, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri,Govt. Advocate.

¶13

SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

¶14

ORDER ON BOARD

¶15

16/09/2026

¶16

This is the eighth bail application. Perusal of the documents enclosed along with the bail application shows that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated 01.05.2024 in M.Cr.C. No. 2603 of 2024. The second bail application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 08.07.2025 in M.Cr.C. No. 5263 of 2025. The third bail application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 04.08.2025 in M.Cr.C. No. 6119 of 2025. The fourth bail application

¶17

¶18

was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 19.09.2025 in M.Cr.C. No. 7546 of 2025. The fifth bail application was also dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 19.01.2026 in M.Cr.C. No. 687 of 2026. The sixth bail application was rejected on merits vide order dated 07.04.2026 in M.Cr.C. No. 3067 of 2026, and the seventh bail application was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 27.07.2026 in M.Cr.C. No. 6628 of 2026.

¶19

This bail application is filed by the applicant under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail on 25.08.2026 as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 116/2023 registered at Police Station – Pakhanjore, District – North Baster Kanker, Chhattisgarh for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 6(5) & 10 of the C.G.P.D.I. Act, 2005.

¶20

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that complainant lodged a report that the applicant is running Biva Nidhi Limited Company and have allured the villagers, got the amount deposited from them and thereafter, closed the company. Based upon the report, crime was registered against the applicant and other co-accused Viveknand Mandal and Prashant Mandal. During the course of investigation, police collected the documents etc. In which, applicants and co-accused person are shown to be Directors of the said company.

¶21

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime. She has not committed any offence as alleged against her. He further submits that there is no direct allegation against the applicant

¶22

¶23

regarding her involvement in or commission of the alleged offence. It is also contended that one of the similarly situated co-accused, namely Vivekanand Mondal, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. No. 5239 of 2025 vide order dated 10.07.2025. It is further submitted that there are as many as 600 witnesses, out of whom 80 witnesses have been examined, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 02.01.2024. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may kindly be enlarged on bail.

¶24

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission of counsel for the applicant and would submit that according to the facts and material available in the charge-sheet, there are allegations against the applicant that the applicant along with her husband co-accused have collected huge money from the poor villagers. He submits that an amount of Rs. 3,38,100/- and Rs. 48,18,800/- have been transferred from the Biva Nidhi Limited Company to the account of the applicant which is being run by the applicant and the other co-accused persons. It is also contended that the applicant is also one of the Director of the company as is reflecting from the documents collected by the police i.e. Articles of Association, Memorandum of Association, Certificate of Incorporation, Certificate of Commencement of Business etc.

¶25

I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents filed along with the bail application.

¶26

The allegation against the applicant is that the applicant and other co-accused persons including her husband has collected about

¶27

¶28

Rs. 1 Crore from poor villagers. There is huge amount of transfer from the Biva Nidhi Limited Company account to the bank account of the applicant. Further, while considering the bail application of the co-accused Vivekanand Mondal in M.Cr.C. No. 5239 of 2025, the arguement was raised that he is brother in law of applicant and the company is being run by the applicant and her husband. It is also one of the argument raised therein that no amount has been transfered in the account of co-accused Vivekanand Mondal.

¶29

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties, documents enclosed along with the bail application, and further considering that no new ground has been shown for reconsideration of the prayer for bail, this Court does not find the present eighth bail application to be a fit case for grant of bail.

¶30

Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is dismissed .

¶31

Certified copy as per rules.

¶32

Sd/- Sd/(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶33

vaibhav

Smt. Minti Mandal v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Smt. Minti Mandal v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases