Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 55920 (CHH)

GULEKH KUMHAR v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/8897/2025 · 2025-12-09

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:60066 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8897 of 2025 Gulekh Kumhar S/o Lala Kumhar Aged About 42 Years R/o Chadaipanka, Dipapali, Po- Chadeipank, Distt.- Sonapur, Odisha. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Sakri, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Niraj Baghel, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 10.12.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 936/2024, registered at Police Station Sakri, District – Bilaspur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 61(2), 337(5), 318(4), 111(4), 323 and 3(5) of BNS. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that Johnson Ekka lodged a report in the Sakri police Station alleging that the main accused/applicant in the case called him on his mobile No. 9242329554 and introduced himself as a bank employee and in the name of coming to the bank to update KYC, told him about the process of online KYC, and took banking information and OTP from the applicant and took an online loan form RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 his bank account and cheated him of a total of Rs.26,74,701/-. Apart form this, shopping was also done using the applicant's credit card, in connection with which the accused have been arrested. Hence, this application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. The applicant is in jail since 23.05.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. It is further submitted that Johnson Ekka lodged a report in the Sakri police Station alleging that the main accused/applicant in the case called him on his mobile No. 9242329554 and introduced himself as a bank employee and in the name of coming to the bank to update KYC, told him about the process of online KYC, and took banking information and OTP from the applicant and took an online loan form his bank account and cheated him of a total of Rs.26,74,701/-, apart form this, shopping was also done using the applicant's credit card, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of the offence, material available in the case dairy and the fact that Johnson Ekka lodged a report in the Sakri police Station alleging that 3 the main accused/applicant in the case called him on his mobile No. 9242329554 and introduced himself as a bank employee and in the name of coming to the bank to update KYC, told him about the process of online KYC, and took banking information and OTP from the applicant and took an online loan form his bank account and cheated him of a total of Rs.26,74,701/-, apart form this, shopping was also done using the applicant's credit card, charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant- Gulekh Kumhar, involved in Crime No. 936/2024, registered at Police Station Sakri, District – Bilaspur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 61(2), 337(5), 318(4), 111(4), 323 and 3(5) of BNS, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and concluded the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar