1 2025:CGHC:20970 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3442 of 2025 Rajesh Das S/o Shri Lakhan Das Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Chofala Niche Tola, Police Station Chandramandih, District Jamui (Bihar) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Khadganwa, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Hemant Kumar Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Dy. Adv. General. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07.05.2025 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 302/2024 registered at Police Station : Khadganwa, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 66 and 66D of the Information Technology Act. 2. According to the prosecution's story, the complainant, Suraj Lal Singh, submitted a written complaint to the police station, stating ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.05.08 12:14:44 +0530 2 that on 05.12.2024, he received an unknown call from mobile number 9508400484. The caller claimed, "Please update your Jio number from 4G to 5G, and your mobile will work properly." Following the instructions, the complainant pressed button number 1. Another call came from the same number, stating that the upgrade was successful and that his mobile would be closed for 24 hours before restarting. However, upon visiting his Central Bank, the complainant discovered that Rs. 9,07,012/- had been fraudulently deducted from his account. An FIR was registered against the holder of mobile number 9508400484. The accused was arrested on 13.01.2025, and a charge sheet was filed before the competent court after completing the investigation. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. It is argued that the applicant hasn't received a single penny, directly or indirectly, from the complainant's account, and his arrest is based on virtually no evidence. He submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 13.01.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge- sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. He submits that the applicant, along with other co-accused, allegedly committed online fraud of Rs. 9,07,012/- with the 3 complainant, and the said amount was recovered from the account of co-accused Abhesh Kumar, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the nature and gravity of the offense, and the allegation against the applicant is that the applicant, along with other co-accused, allegedly committed online fraud of Rs. 9,07,012/- with the complainant, and the said amount was recovered from the account of co-accused Abhesh Kumar, the applicant's case is distinguishable from the said co-accused, further, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court, the present applicant has been in jail since 13.01.2025, the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Rajesh Das, involved in Crime No. 302/2024 registered at Police Station : Khadganwa, District Manendragarh- Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 66 and 66D of the Information Technology Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following 4 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 law. (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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (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 proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (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 sufficient cause, then it shall be 5 open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek