1 2025:CGHC:18343 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2512 of 2025 Nikhil Dewangan S/o Narayan Dewangan Aged About 31 Years R/o Village- Janjgir, Thana And Tahsil- Janjgir, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.). --- Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The District- Magistrate- Janjgir- Champa, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) (Concerned Police Station- City Kotwali Janjgir, District- Janjgir- Champa ) --- Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Hari Agrawal, Advocate For Non-Applicant(s) : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 23.04.2025 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 142/2025, registered at Police Station Janjgir, MANISH YADAV Digitally signed by MANISH YADAV Date: 2025.04.24 18:48:23 +0530 2 District - Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2) OF BNS, 2023, 66(C) of Information Technology Act & Section 43(3)(E) of Telecommunication Act, 2023. 3. Prosecution case in brief is that the applicant is running a mobile shop by the name of Gonics Mobile Shop and the applicant along with other co-accused Sourabh Paliwal, who happens to the distributor of Jio Mobile Company has got prepared/activated 25-30 Jio SIMS using the identity of various persons without their permission and also distributed them to other persons, due to which some big incident of fraud or cyber crime could happen. On the basis of the which, a crime was registered against the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he is falsely implicated in the present case. He also submits that a Jio LAPU (Local Area Payment Unit) SIM for the purpose of SIM activation and recharge has been issued in the name of the applicant, but around six months back from the date of arrest, applicant has returned back that SIM to the Area Jio Distributor i.e. Sourabh Paliwal, in all the alleged fraudulent SIM activation,e-KYC of said Sourabh Paliwal’s agent namely Omkar Dheevar is recorded, as such, no crime has been 3 committed by the applicant or at his instance. It is further submitted that the applicant has no any criminal antecedents. He further submits that in similar alleged crime No. i.e. Crime No. 141/2025 registered on same day in the same Police Station, this Court has enlarged the innocent accused on regular bail in MCRC No. 2088/2025 vide order dated 17.03.2025, further the charge-sheet has been submitted and the applicant is in jail since 02.03.2025. Therefore, he prays that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and also endorse the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant. He also submitted that charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity of allegation made against the applicant, in similar alleged crime this Court has enlarged the accused in MCRC No. 2088/2025 vide order dated 17.03.2025, further the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 02.03.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 4 8. 4 8. Let applicant, Nikhil Dewangan, involved in Crime No. 142/2025, registered at Police Station Janjgir, District - Janjgir- Champa (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2) OF BNS, 2023, 66(C) of Information Technology Act & Section 43(3)(E) of Telecommunication Act, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) 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 lawh. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of BNS. (iii) 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 5 proclamation, then, the trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of BNS. (iv) 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 sufÏcient 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. 9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Manish