Chattisgarh High Court
Pooja Manikpuri vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 1 May, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:20497
NIKITA
JAIN NAFR
Digitally signed
by NIKITA JAIN
Date:
2026.05.02
12:01:17 +0530
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2406 of 2026
1 - Digam Jolhe S/o Guddu Jolhe Aged About 27 Years R/o Village- Raykona
Police Station And Tahshil Sarsiwa District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.)
--- Applicant
versus
1 - State Of Government Through Police Station Sarsiwa District- Sarangarh-
Bilaigarh (C.G.)
--- Non-applicant
For Applicant : Shri Amit Kumar, Advocate.
For State/Respondent : Dr. Sourabh Pandey, Dy. A.G.
MCRC No. 3856 of 2026
1 - Govinda Sahu S/o- Late Samaru Sahu Aged About 31 Years R/o- Rajeev Nagar, Ashok Chowk Khurispar, Bhilai, P S Khursipar, District- Durg (C.G.)
--- Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Sarsiwan District- Sarangarh Bilaigarh (C.G.) 2
--- Non-applicant For Applicant : Shri Aman Pandey, Advocate appears along with Shri Vinamra Shirvastava, Advocate.
For State/Respondent : Dr. Sourabh Pandey, Dy. A.G. MCRC No. 3429 of 2026 1 - Abhishek Jaiswal S/o Shri Raghuvir Prasad Jaiswal Aged About 35 Years R/o Chhote Atarmuda, Collectorate Road, Kelo Vihar, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh
---Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Officer-In-Charge, Police Station Sarsiwa, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh Chhattisgarh
--- Non-applicant For Applicant : Shri Aman Tamboli, Advocate. For State/Respondent : Dr. Sourabh Pandey, Dy. A.G. MCRC No. 3294 of 2026 1 - Dinesh Anant S/o Shri Jagnathiya Aged About 34 Years R/o Gauradipa, Thana- Sarsiwan, Teh. Sarsiwan, Distt.- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (Cg)
---Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Sarsiwan, Distt.- Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (Cg)
--- Non-applicant For Applicant : Shri Vivek Kumar Shirvastava, Advocate. For State/Respondent : Dr. Sourabh Pandey, Dy. A.G. 3 MCRC No. 2433 of 2026 1 - Pooja Manikpuri D/o Laxmikant (Wrongly Mentioned As W/o) Aged About 34 Years R/o Posted At Hdfc Bank Sarangarh Dist.- Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.)
---Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Sarsiwan, District- Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.)
--- Non-applicant For Applicant : Shri Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate. For State/Respondent : Dr. Sourabh Pandey, Dy. A.G. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 01.05.2026
1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 389/2025 registered at Police Station - Sarsiwa, District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 318(2), 336(3), 336(4), 338, 340(2), 341(1), 341(2), 3(5) and 61 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a written application was submitted by one Veena Yadav and lodged a report at Police Station Sarsiwa, District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) that the co-accused Shive Sahu and others in connection with earlier Crime No.131/2024 4 defrauded approximately 400-500 investors of approximately 30-35 crores and purchased the movable and immovable properties. It is alleged further that certain bank accounts which were earlier sealed/held during investigation were illegally unfreezed by submitting a forged application allegedly bearing the fake seal of the Station House Officer, Police Station Sarsiwa. Prima facie, on 20.11.2025, the applicant got a typed application at a typing center near the Court premises at Sarangarh, which was later used for unfreezing the account. It is submitted further that the applicant was working as a driver of co-accused Shiva Sahu and had no knowledge regarding the alleged financial transactions. On the basis of the report, FIR has been filed and uring the investigation proceedings, the accused were arrested. Thereafter, the offence was registered against the applicants under Sections Sections 318(2), 336(3), 336(4), 338, 340(2), 341(1), 341(2), 3(5) and 61 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case and merely on allegation of forgery of document, they have been implicated. It is submitted further that the applicants have no criminal antecedents and have been in jail since 09.01.2026, 08.02.2026, 08.02.2026, 08.02.2026 and 15.03.2026 respectively, conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, counsel prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application.
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and 5 further the fact that the names of the applicants have come into light only on the basis of forgery of document and the applicants are in jail since 09.01.2026, 08.02.2026, 08.02.2026, 08.02.2026 and 15.03.2026 respectively, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicants are also entitled to be grant regular bail.
7. Let the Applicants - Digam Jolhe, Pooja Manikpuri, Dinesh Anant, Abhishek Jaiswal and Govinda Sahu involved in Crime No. 389/2025 registered at Police Station - Sarsiwa, District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(2), 336(3), 336(4), 338, 340(2), 341(1), 341(2), 3(5) and 61 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 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:-
(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, 6 proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iv) The applicants 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 applicants 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 them in accordance with law.
8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
- Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Nikita