1. This is the fifth bail application preferred by the applicant under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No. 191/2022 for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of IPC registered at Police Station - Kotara Road, Dist. - Raigarh.
2. As per the prosecution story, at the relevant time, the applicant Rahul Sharma was posted as Branch Manager of Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank, Branch Karodimal Nagar, Raigarh. Being an employee of a Bank, he committed criminal breach of trust and embezzlement of KCC amount i.e. Rs. 3,57,13,100/-. It is also alleged that he transferred the amount into the bank account of his mother. On report being lodged to the above effect, the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 409, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the IPC were registered against the present applicant and during the course of investigation, he was arrested.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 3.9.2023 and till date, only 4 witnesses out of total 154 witnesses have been examined. She further submits that it is right of the applicant to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution. She has placed reliance on the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sahil Manoj Machare Versus State of Maharashtra 2026 SCC OnLine SC 810. She prays to allow this application.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose. He submits that previous bail applications of the applicant have been rejected on 10.4.2024, 17.1.2025, 27.2025 and 14.5.2026 and there is no change in circumstance of the case, and thus, the application is liable to be rejected.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
7. From a perusal of the case diary, it appears that applicant is languishing in jail since 3.9.2023 and till date, only 4 witnesses out of total 154 witnesses have been examined. Recently, Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sahil Manoj Machare (supra) held that prolonged incarceration without progress in trial violates the fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. Relevant paragraphs 5 to 7 read as under :-
"5. In such circumstances, referred to above, are left with no other option but to say that the right of the accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution could be said to have been infringed.
6. We are mindful of the fact that the petitioner is charged with the offence of murder but time and again, we have said that howsoever serious the crime may be, if the right of speedy trial is infringed, then Court must consider appropriately. the plea for bail.
7. Here is a case wherein past almost 4 years, the petitioner is in jail but not a single witness has been examined."
8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, and the material available on record, particularly the fact that only 4 out of 154 witnesses have been examined till date, the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 3.9.2023, this Court is of the view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
9. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-
(a) he shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required;
(b) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court; and
(c) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial.
The observation made hereinabove is for the purpose of deciding this bail application only, the learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits.
