VIJAY KUMAR SARAF (WRONGLY MENTIONED AS VIJAY SHARAF) vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010302692026 2026:CGHC:38922
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 7503 of 2026
Vijay Kumar Saraf (Wrongly Mentioned As Vijay Sharaf) S/o Ganga Ram
Saraf Aged About 54 Years (Aadhar No. 5659 1818 6665) R/o Vikas Nagar
ALFIZA
BAIG
Gali No.3, Kotra Road Ward No.40, Raigarh District- And Tehsil- Raigarh
(C.G.)
Digitally signed
by ALFIZA BAIG
Date: 2026.09.03
10:52:52 +0530
… Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer, Police Station -
City Kotwali, District- Raigarh (C.G.)
... Respondent
For Applicant : Mr. Pushp Kumar Gupta, Advocate
For Respondent-State : Mr. Atanu Gosh, Dy. Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge
ORDER ON BOARD
02.09.2026
1. Applicant has filed this First Bail application under Section 483 of
Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he
has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 1363/2020 registered at
Police Station – City Kotwali, District- Raigarh, (C.G.) for offence
punishable under Section 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and
Section 6 of Chhattisgarh Protection of Interest of Depositors Act, 2005.

2
2. Case of prosecution in brief is that, one Vikas Niganiya (complainant)
lodged a written report in the concerned police station alleging that Om
Prakash Sharma, Branch Manager, Kabir Chowk, District- Raigarh
approached him and made him to believe that Sahara India Society is a
licensed society and works as per the guidelines issued by the
Reserved Bank of India and if he invests the amount in the Sahara India
Society, he will surely get the principle amount with interest. By
successive approach and assurances given by Om Prakash Sharma,
complainant deposited/invested money in Sahara India in the name of
his mother and wife from June, 2017 till September, 2017 to the tune of
Rs. 40,00,000/- (Forty Lakhs Rupees). Thereafter, the said Branch
Manager with the other higher officials have advised the complainant to
invest/deposit small amounts in different forms in Sahara India Society.
Under confusion, complainant asked the Branch Manager and the other
officials as to whether, if he deposits in the Sahara India, the money will
be deposited in the Sahara India or not? Again, he was assured that the
amount will be deposited with Sahara India and thereafter, the amount
of Rs. 40,00,000/- was deposited in 182 accounts in Sahara India
Society and 182 bonds were issued. Thereafter, he was not returned
back the invested amount.
3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely
implicated in the crime, he has not committed offence as alleged. He
further submits that the applicant has been shown to be working as
Senior Regional Worker, at the intervening period applicant was not
posted at any territorial jurisdiction of the Police Station where the FIR
was registered. He further submits that according to his instructions on

3
account of action taken by Securities and Exchange Board of India
(S.E.B.I) against the company the entire financial transaction of the
company are stopped and therefore, the amount deposited by the
depositor could not be returned within time. According to the directives
issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India from time to time for
disbursement of amount of Rs. 5,000/- crore from the corpus fund for
repayment of amount to the investors/depositors and further directed to
make the mechanism for its disbursement to the depositors. Pursuant
thereto, the portal was opened and the investors/depositors were asked
to submit their applications along with the details and thereafter, as per
his information, according to the procedure adopted for repayment of
the deposited amount, the depositors were repaid the part of their
deposit directly in their bank accounts.
4. He lastly points out that the co-accused in the same crime were
enlarged on bail by this Court in MCRC No. 1058/2024, MCRC No.
2569 of 2024, MCRC No. 5100 of 2024, MCRC No. 2907 and MCRC
No. 2721 of 2023 and the case of the applicant is also on the similar
footing. Hence, he may also be enlarged on bail.
5. Learned counsel for State opposes the submission made by learned
counsel for the applicant, however, he do not dispute the submission
made by learned counsel for the applicant with regard to the release of
co-accused in the aforementioned bail application. He also submits that
the applicant was arrested subsequent to them and upon query he fairly
submits that after the arrest of applicant charge-sheet has been filed
against him also.

4
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents
enclosed along with the bail application.
7. Perusal of the order dated 29.03.2023 passed in WPC No. 191/2022
passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India would show that the
learned Solicitor General of India has submitted before the Hon’ble
Supreme Court that the amount of Rs. 24,979.67/- crores of the
company is lying with S.E.B.I. in the account of Sahara- S.E.B.I. Refund
Account and from that account, Hon’ble Supreme Court has directed for
transfer of Rs. 50,00,00,00,000/- (Five Thousand Crores) to the Central
Registrar of Co-operative Societies for returning back the amount to the
legitimate depositors of the Sahara Group of Co-operatives Societies.
Pursuant to the direction issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court to the
genuine depositors is not disputed by the counsel for the State.
8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,
nature of allegations, material available in the case diary, as also, the
documents enclosed along with the bail application, submission of
counsel for the respective parties, without commenting anything on the
merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this application for grant of bail.
9. Accordingly, bail application is allowed . It is directed that the applicant
shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum
of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the
Court on the conditions that-
(a) 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 treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in
accordance with law.

5
(b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court
on each date fixed, either personally or through him
counsel. In case of him absence, without sufficient cause,
the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(c) 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.
(d) 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.
10. 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.
Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu)
Alfiza JUDGE