1 2025:CGHC:56605 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9404 of 2025 • Ajay Kumar Mandal S/o Jay Prakash Mandal Aged About 29 Years Chandana, District- Sonaryathdi , District- Deoghar, Jharkhand ... Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Cyber Cell, Bhilai Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Virendra Kashyap, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 20.11.2025 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. 05/2024, registered at Police Station – Cyber Cell, Bhilai District – Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420 of IPC and 66-D of IT Act. VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.11.21 16:54:39 +0530 2 2. The first bail application filed by the applicant was rejected on merit vide order dated 31.07.2025 in MCRC No.5994 of 2025. 3. The case of the prosecution, is that an FIR was registered on 26.11.2024 against unknown persons, approximately five months after the incident, alleging that between 19.06.2024 and 26.06.2024 the complainant had received calls from five different phone numbers 7857991870, 9007131081, 7643881386, 9229450911, and 9153528536-on his own phone number 9827461280, wherein the callers requested renewal of his credit card and enhancement of its limit. It is further alleged that a WhatsApp message containing a link was sent to him from the number 7857991870, and upon updating through the said link, a total amount of 1,89,450.77 (Rupees One Lakh ₹ Eighty-Nine Thousand Four Hundred Fifty and Seventy-Seven Paise) was fraudulently deducted from his AU Finance Bank credit card no. 4665051032946221 and ICICI Bank credit card no. 4375519592318008. The present applicant was subsequently taken into custody by the Chhattisgarh Police on 07.03.2025, and thereafter the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. 4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He also submits that there is one criminal antecedent registered against the present applicant in the State of Jharkhand of similar nature, in which he has been granted bail by the competent Court of Jharkhand. A copy of the same 3 annexed along with bail application at page No.18. He further submits that in the present case, complainant has already received the entire disputed amount on 10.06.2025 and a mutual settlement has been arrived between the parties and complainant has also moved an application under Section 320(1) of Cr.P.C. expressing that he does not want to prosecute the matter further, but same has been rejected. He lastly submits that applicant is in jail since 07.03.2025, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that there is one criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant, in the State of Jharkhand, in which he has already been granted bail by the competent Court of the Jharkhand and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. 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 and the fact that there is one criminal antecedent registered against the present applicant in the State of Jharkhand of similar nature, in which he has been granted bail by the competent Court of Jharkhand, complainant has already received the entire disputed amount on 10.06.2025 and a mutual settlement has been arrived between the parties and 4 complainant has also moved an application under Section 320(1) of Cr.P.C. expressing that he does not want to prosecute the matter further charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, the applicant is in jail since 07.03.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 8. 8. Let applicant, Ajay Kumar Mandal, involved in Crime No. 05/2024, registered at Police Station – Cyber Cell, Bhilai District – Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420 of IPC and 66-D of IT Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 5 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. 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. Office 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 vaishali