Facts
The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No. 585/2024, registered for alleged offences under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 6 and 10 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors’ Interests Act, 2005.
Source reference: para. 1The prosecution alleged that the applicant worked as a peon at a company office involved in inducing women to deposit ₹30,000 each on promises of financial assistance, loans and monthly payments; the collected funds were allegedly misappropriated.
Source reference: para. 2The applicant contended that she had no role in the transactions or collection of money and relied on parity with nine co-accused who had been granted bail.
Source reference: para. 3She had been in custody since 4 August 2026, and the trial was likely to take time.
Source reference: para. 3The State opposed bail but did not dispute that co-accused had been released.
Source reference: para. 4Issues
Whether the applicant was entitled to regular bail having regard to her alleged role, the bail granted to co-accused, her period of custody and the likely duration of the trial.
Source reference: paras. 3–6Law Applied
Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, provides the basis for the High Court’s consideration of an application for regular bail.
Source reference: para. 1In deciding the application, the Court considered the nature of the allegations, the role attributed to the applicant, parity with co-accused, the period of custody and the likely time required to conclude the trial.
Source reference: para. 6Reasoning
The Court considered the applicant’s alleged role to be limited to working as a peon, alongside the fact that several co-accused in the same crime had already been granted bail.
Source reference: para. 6It also took into account the applicant’s custody since 4 August 2026 and the prospect of a lengthy trial.
Source reference: para. 6On those circumstances, and without expressing any view on the merits, the Court found that the applicant deserved regular bail.
Source reference: para. 6Holding
The bail application was allowed.
The Court directed that the applicant be released on executing a personal bond of ₹50,000 with one surety for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
Source reference: para. 7Bail was subject to conditions prohibiting interference with witnesses or the fair trial and requiring appearance on every date fixed by the trial Court until disposal.
Source reference: para. 7Acts & Sections Cited
3 provisions across 2 statutes referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20231
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 20232
Original Court PDF
TANISHA BAGHELvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
