2025:CGHC:375 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.Cr.C. No. 7768 of 2024 Biren Bandhi, S/o Sanjay Bandhi, aged about 20 Years (Aged Wrongly Mention As 28 Years), R/o 8/1, Tangra 1 Number Line, Gobinda Khatick Road, Kolkata West Bengal (Correct Address), Presently R/o Lanja Ps Kharora, Tahsil Arang, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicant Versus The State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Bande, Distt. Uttar Baster Kanker Chhattisgarh --- Respondent M.Cr.C. No. 7838 of 2024 Syed Shadab Ali @ Karim, S/o Late Syd Mukhtar Ali , aged about 32 Years, R/o G-80, 4th Floor, Maulana Complex, Garden Reach, Kolkata- 700024 (W.B.) ---- Applicant Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Bande District North Bastar Kanker (Chhattisgarh), District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent & ASHISH TIWARI Digitally signed by ASHISH TIWARI Date: 2025.01.06 19:23:03 +0530 -2- M.Cr.C. No. 8580 of 2024 Ejaj Alam @ Samir, S/o Shri Anwar Hussain, aged about 33 Years, R/o G/265 Ramnagar Lane Gardenrich Thana Gardenrich District Kolkata (West Bengal ) (Adress Is As Per The Chargesheet) ---- Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer Police Station Bande District - North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) --- Non-applicant For applicant : Shri Parag Kotecha, Shri Pravin Kumar Tulsyan and Shri Sunil Sahu Advocates. For Non-applicant/State : Shri U.K.S. Chandel, Dy. Advocate General. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03/01/2025 1. These are the first bail applications filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with same Crime No. 02/2024 registered at Police Station - Bande, District- Uttar Bastar, Kanker (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 of the I.P.C. and Section 66(c)(d) of I.T. Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, complainant Munendra -3- Kumar (Inspector) lodged report against unknown persons on the same set of offence that the complainant while searching the Mobile number of the Bank Manager from the Google App. he got the Cell number of the concerned Bank Manager and upon calling from his mobile phone he was asked to transfer the amount online from S.B.I. Farukhabad to C.A.P.S.P. account and after giving the information, an activation code came, which after telling it from the mobile, an amount of Rs.9,50,000/- was withdrawn from the account of the complainant by unknown persons and fraud was committed. Thereafter the aforesaid case was registered against the present applicants. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the present applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the aforementioned case. They also submit that the present applicants have been arrested only on the basis of mere suspicion. They further submit that the applicant, namely, Biren Bandhi and Ejaj Alam @ Samir have no criminal antecedents and Syed Shadab Ali @ Karim has only 01 criminal antecedents under the IPC of the year 2017 which an old case. They also submit that the present applicants are in jail since 04.07.2024, 08.08.2024 and 28.08.2024 respectively, and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, they pray for grant of regular bail to the present applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicants and submits that the charge-sheet has -4- already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case and submits that the present applicants have committed online fraud of Rs. 9,50,000/- to the complainant. He further submits that the applicant, namely, Syed Shadab Ali @ Karim has 01 criminal antecedent under the IPC of the year 2017, therefore, they are not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts & circumstances of the case and further the fact that the applicants, namely, Biren Bandhi and Ejaj Alam @ Samir have no criminal antecedents and Syed Shadab Ali @ Karim has only 01 criminal antecedents under the IPC of the year 2017 which an old and stale case. Moreover, the fact that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case and they are in jail since 04.07.2024, 08.08.2024 and 28.08.2024 respectively, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in these cases. 7. Let the Applicants - Biren Bandhi in MCRC No. 7768 of 2024, Syed Shadab Ali @ Karim in MCRC No. 7838 of 2024 and Ejaj Alam @ Samir, in MCRC No. 8580 of 2024, involved in Crime No. 02/2024 registered at Police Station - Bande, District- Uttar Bastar, Kanker (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 of the I.P.C. and Section 66(c)(d) of I.T. Act., be -5- released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. -6- (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 8. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Ashish/Abhishek