1 2025:CGHC:46595 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1324 of 2025 Shubham Nirmalkar S/o Santram Nirmalkar Aged About 27 Years R/o Near Laxmi Narayan Mandir, Polasipara, Durg, Tehsil And District- Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O., Police Station- Newai, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Shikhar Bakhtiyar, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Jitendra Shrivastava, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 11/09/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of anticipatory bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.79/2025, registered at Police Station Newai, District GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2025.09.12 18:42:20 +0530 2 Durg, CG. for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 420, 419 of IPC (As per the FIR) and u/s 420, 419 of IPC and u/s Section 66C of the Information Technology Act, and section 42(3)(e) of Telecommunication Act (As per trial court order). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant on 09/04/2025 has lodged a written complaint against the present applicant alleging that the applicant has without the permission of the complainant has issued a SIM in the name of the complainant by giving the reason that the process has not been completed took the thumb impression, and photo of the complainant twice in the year 2022 and have sold the SIM to someone else. On the basis of these allegations, the present FIR came to be registered. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He would submit that the FIR is based on a presumption that the applicant sold a SIM card to the complainant in 2022, and another SIM was allegedly issued in the complainant's name without his knowledge and complainant willingly purchased the SIM and provided details, so no offence under the Telecommunication Act is made out. He would further submit that the complaint was lodged only after the complainant received a call about another SIM in his name, and he assumed the applicant was involved. He would further submit that two FIRs were lodged on the same day for similar allegations, one after 1 year and another after 3 years 3 of SIM purchase, indicating false implication and custodial interrogation is not warranted, as material documents can be verified by investigating authorities, therefore he prays to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. He would submit that in compliance of the Court’s order dated 02/09/2025, the Investigating Officer has filed his personal affidavit. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. In compliance of the Court’s order dated 02/09/2025, the Investigating Officer Rajesh Kumar Sahu has filed his personal affidavit which reads as under:- “1.It is respectfully submitted that, the complainant made a written complaint to the Police Station Newai on 09.04.2025 and alleged that the present accused has sold an Airtel Sim No.6232162756 by using a document of complainant like Adhar Card and the Sim No. is used by someone else. The complainant itself came in knowledge when the Durg Police came before him for confirmation that the Sim No. 6232162756 whether using by the complainant. Then he has come in knowledge and written complaint was made to the Police Station- Durg. 4 2.The FIR lodged on the complaint was made by him on 09.04.2025 and the investigation officer taken the Call Detail Record (CDR) of the Sim No. 6232162756 and search the IMEI No. which was found 359912107019680 and it has come in knowledge that the several Sim Nos. used by IMEI No.359912107019680 the CDR of IMEI No. 359912107019680 received in the Investigation on 09.09.2025 and the present applicant has sold several Sim card during that period to the so many person which have to still investigate in the present crime Number 79/2025. 3.It is respectfully submitted that, the investigation in the crime No.79/2025 is continue and several issues has to be remain enquiry therefore, at this stage the material collected by the Investigation Officer in the present case against the present applicant is being demonstrated in affidavit.” 7. From perusal of the affidavit filed by the Investigating Officer goes to show that the applicant sold multiple SIM cards during the relevant period, which were used with the same IMEI number (359912107019680) that was found to be associated with the SIM card allegedly sold to the complainant. Considering the seriousness of allegations levelled against the applicant and further the fact that investigation is still going on, therefore I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 5 8. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant - Shubham Nirmalkar, involved in Crime No.79/2025, registered at Police Station Newai, District Durg, CG. for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 420, 419 of IPC (As per the FIR) and u/s 420, 419 of IPC and u/s Section 66C of the Information Technology Act, and section 42(3)(e) of Telecommunication Act (As per trial court order), is rejected. Sd/-Sd S Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice gouri