2025:CGHC:57708 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 60 of 2025

1 - Purnendra Dewangan S/o Shambhucharan Dewangan Aged About 40 Years R/o Village- Rampur, Post- Katangi, Police Station- Kasdol, District :

Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh

2 - Dheerendra Kumar Dewangan S/o Badri Prasad Dewangan Aged About 34 Years R/o Village- Jaawalpur, Police Station- Baloda, District : Janjgir-

Champa, Chhattisgarh ...Appellant(s)

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Arakshi Centre, Basantpur, Rajnandgaon, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For appellants : Mr. Basant Dewangan, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble S hri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Judgment on Board

27.11.2025

1. This criminal appeal has been filed under Section 16 of Chhattisgarh Depositors Interest Act, 2005 by the appellants against the Judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.12.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge (Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act) Rajnandgaon (C.G.), in Digitaly Special (PDI Act) Case No. 04/2019, whereby the appellants have signed by JYOTI JHA Date:

2025.12.10 +0530 been convicted and sentenced as follows:-

Convicted under Section Sentenced

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that during years 2014-2017 in District Rajnandgaon, the appellants instituted a financial institution namely Shubh Sai Devcon India Ltd. Total amount of Rs. 23,54,150/- was collected from general public as deposition. While returning the investments to investors, the fraudulent default is al- leged against the appellants. On the said complaint of the com- plainant, the Basantpur Police Station, has registered a case under Crime No. 371/2016 against the accused/appellants. After comple- tion of investigation, the appellants have been arrested. The charge-sheet was filed for the aforesaid offences against the appel-

lants / accused before the competent Court against the appellants.

3. In order to bring home the above-stated offences, the prosecution examined as many as 31 witnesses. Statement of the accused/ap- pellants were recorded under Section 313 of the CrPC, in which they denied their guilt and have taken the stand that they have been falsely implicated in this case.

4. The learned Special Judge (Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors

Interest Act) Rajnandgaon (C.G.), after appreciating oral and

documentary evidence available on record vide judgment dated

20.12.2024, convicted the appellants for the offence punishable

under Section 10 Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act

and sentenced them as mentioned in opening paragraph of this order.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that conviction of the appellants is erroneous, contrary to the evidence and is bad in law. Learned counsel below failed to appreciate the fact that the appel- lants were in jail in another criminal case while the bonds of the in- vestors were not mature and in a hurried manner the complainant had lodged the report against the appellants for fraudulent default in repayment of investments. He further submits that none of the com- petent authority under the Act of 2005 had approved or directed to register the criminal case against the appellants even then the pros- ecution against the appellants was continued. He further submits that being in jail before maturity of bonds, the appellants could not have conspired to fraudulently default in repayment of investors bonds. None of the seizures were made from the appellants from which it could be ascertained that the appellants defaulted in pay- ment of depositions. He further submits that all the properties in the name of the appellants’ company have been attached and auc- tioned by the prescribed authoriti