1 2025:CGHC:52313 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7424 of 2025 Dinesh Dattaram Sable S/o Dattaram Sable Aged About 38 Years R/o Room No. 817, Shiv Shakti Choul, Link Road, Muttumari Nagar, Malad West Mumbai, Maharashtra. ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Geedam, District South Bastar Dantewada C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Alok Kumar Dewangan, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27.10.2025 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. 27/2025 registered at Police Station – Geedam District – South Bastar Dantewada (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 111(1)(3) of the BNS and Section 66(d) of the I.T. Act. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that, the applicant is accused of depositing the cheated amount of Rs 50,000/- from the applicant 2 Bhupendra Telami in his Utkarsh Bank account number 1626017208184432. It is alleged that the applicant has opened total 8 bank accounts, in which he deposits the cheated amount. It is also alleged that ATM card, Cheque-books of many banks have been seized from the possession of the accused. Thus, the accused/ applicant is accused of getting money deposited in his account through online fraud with the other co accused persons 3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant is 38 years old, a young and responsible person, and the sole earning member of his family comprising his aged parents, wife, and son. The applicant has been falsely implicated by the prosecution on the basis of mere suspicion, despite having no criminal background. He further submits that in the present case, three other co-accused have already been granted bail by the Trial Court, and the main accused, Mrs. Vaishali Padale, has also been granted bail by the Hon’ble High Court on 30/07/2025 in MCRC No. 4291/2025. The applicant belongs to a very poor family, and his prolonged incarceration is causing severe financial hardship to his dependents. The applicant has been in continuous judicial custody since 22/04/2025. Therefore, he prays that regular bail may kindly be granted to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature. It is contended that the applicant is involved in an organized online fraud along with other co-accused persons, wherein cheated 3 amounts were deposited in his various bank accounts. The applicant is specifically alleged to have received an amount of Rs. 50,000/- in his Utkarsh Bank Account No. 1626017208184432, which was fraudulently obtained from the complainant, Bhupendra Telami. It is further submitted that during the investigation, it was revealed that the applicant had opened as many as eight bank accounts in different banks, which were used for depositing the cheated money. The seizure of multiple ATM cards and cheque books from the possession of the applicant corroborates his active participation in the alleged offence, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the present applicant, and also taking into account that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, and that three co-accused persons, namely Jitendra Mairotha, Abhishek Gupta, and Biram Ram Nayak, have already been granted bail by the Trial Court, while one co-accused, namely Vaishali Padale, has been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 4291 of 2025 vide order dated 30.07.2025, and further considering that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, the applicant has been in judicial custody since 30.07.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some more time, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant – Dinesh Dattaram Sable, involved in Crime No. 27/2025 registered at Police Station – Geedam District – South Bastar 4 Dantewada (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 111(1)(3) of the BNS and Section 66(d) of the I.T. Act, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two local 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 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 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. - SSd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav