1 2025:CGHC:53617 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8728 of 2025 Suraj Kumar Vishwas S/o Late Shri Shankar Chandra Vishwas, Aged About 30 Years R/o Amaraiya Para, Bhojpur, Champa, P.S. Champa, Dist. Janjgir Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O., P.S. Champa, District – Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 03.11.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this Second Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 173/2025, registered at Police Station – Champa, District – Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) and 61(2) of BNS, Section 66C of IT Act, and Section 43(3)(E) of the Telecommunication Act, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that Allegation against the present applicant, namely Suraj Kumar Vishwas is that he allegedly used forged RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 identity documents in order to fraudulently activate Ten mobile SIM cards through a Point of Sale (POS) unit namely Suraj Mobile Palace. This fraud came into the knowledge when Cyber Cell, Janjgir-Champa, received complaints and found that the SIM cards were issued using personal details and Aadhar documents of un-related individuals without their consent. It is further alleged that applicant Suraj Vishwas, being Operator of Suraj Mobile Palace, Champa, was allegedly distributing mobile phones to the authorized distributor of Airtel Company, who activated new SIM from his POS/LAPO on the instructions of Territory Salas Manager, whose mobile number is 78695878888 and got 10 SIMs of different numbers of Airtel company activated by cheating the customers while purchasing SIM and shared OTP with applicant Surendra Kumar Berman to make him agent. After becoming an agent, Surendra Kumar Berman, with the intention of activation of SIMs fraudulently, got a total of 10 SIMs activated fraudulently and several new SIMS activated in the name of co-accused Suraj Kumar Vishwas and provided to others and thereby committed the aforesaid offences. 3. First bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 30.06.2025 passed in MCRC No. 4256/2025, on merits. 4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 01.05.2025, and till date out of 11 prosecution witnesses, only 5 witnesses have been examined by the learned trial Court. The trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the manner in which, offence of distribution 3 of SIM cards using personal detail and Aadhaar cards of unrelated individuals without their consent is said to have been committed by the applicant, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant, it is observed that the applicant is in jail since 01.05.2025, and till date out of 11 prosecution witnesses, only 5 witnesses have been examined by the learned trial Court, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 8. Let applicant, Suraj Kumar Vishwas, involved in Crime No. 173/2025, registered at Police Station – Champa, District – Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) and 61(2) of BNS, Section 66C of IT Act, and Section 43(3)(E) of the Telecommunication Act, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (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 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. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of passing of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 10. OfÏce 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 Rajshekhar