1 2025:CGHC:57022 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9463 of 2025 Ravi Kumar Kashyap S/o Shivkumar Kashyap, Aged About 30 Years Occupation Private Service, R/o Village Sukhari, Police Station Gandhinagar, Tehsil Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Krishna Tandon, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24.11.2025 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 357/2025 registered at Police Station Ambikapur, District AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Sarguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) r/w Sections 3(5), 319(2), 111(2) of BNS and Section 66(C) of IT Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a report from the Additional Superintendent of Police / Nodal Officer, Cyber Cell, Surguja revealed that certain Point-of-Sale (POS) agents were fraudulently issuing mobile numbers. During inquiry, it was found that accused Lal Bahadur Sarthi @ Burju and Tejbal Das had, in 2024, obtained SIM cards of Idea, Jio, and Airtel in the names of villagers of Parsa, and used those documents to open multiple bank accounts in various banks at Ambikapur. They kept the passbooks, SIM cards, ATM cards, and cheque books in their possession for misuse. Based on this, Crime No. 357/2025 was registered under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of BNS. During investigation, the victims stated that the applicant/accused Ravi Kashyap, along with Amleshwor Kumar Vaishnav and Gautam Singh, took their documents, opened accounts in their names, and later handed those accounts over to main accused Lal Bahadur and Tejbal. On interrogation, the applicant admitted to participating in the conspiracy of opening accounts and conducting transactions using those accounts. Considering the financial fraud, conspiracy, and misuse of victims’ identities, Section 61(2) BNS was added, and the applicant was arrested. Hence, the bail application. 3 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 21.08.2025 in MCRC No.4700 of 2025, therefore this second bail application is filed on the ground that at the time of first bail application, charge-sheet was not filed, but presently charge-sheet has been filed. He also submits that there is no direct or indirect evidence against the applicant, the only fact relied upon is that a mobile number was found registered in his name, which he never used, and this aspect was not even properly investigated by the police. The applicant’s name does not appear in the FIR, and he has been charge sheeted solely on the basis of the memorandum statements of co-accused, making his implication wholly unjustified. the applicant is in jail since 30.05.2025, hence, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the first bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 21.08.2025, whereas charge-sheet was filed against the applicant on 21.07.2025 and further the earlier counsel, who appeared in the first bail application had made a statement that she does not want to press the said bail application as the applicant wants to co-operate with the trial. He further submits that the applicant is alleged to have collected documents of villagers and, in conspiracy with co-accused persons, opened bank 4 accounts in their names using fraudulently obtained SIM cards and later handed over these accounts to the main accused for misuse and participated in conducting transactions through those accounts, thereby the applicant had opened 8 mule accounts and misused the same, as such, the bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. From perusal of the records, it transpires that this is the second bail application of the applicant and the first bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 21.08.2025 in MCRC No.4700 of 2025, therefore this second bail application is filed on the ground that at the time of first bail application, charge-sheet was not filed and presently, the same is filed, but considering the fact that the first bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 21.08.2025, whereas it has been pointed out by learned State counsel that charge-sheet was filed against the applicant on 21.07.2025 and the earlier counsel, who appeared in the first bail application had made a statement that she does not want to press the said bail application as the applicant wants to co-operate with the trial. Further considering the fact that the applicant is alleged to have collected documents of villagers and, in conspiracy with co-accused persons, opened bank accounts in their names using 5 fraudulently obtained SIM cards and later handed over these accounts to the main accused for misuse, by which the applicant had opened 8 mule accounts and misused the same by facilitating financial fraud and identity misuse. As such, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant-Ravi Kumar Kashyap, involved in Crime No. 357/2025 registered at Police Station Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) r/w Sections 3(5), 319(2), 111(2) of BNS and Section 66(C) of IT Act, is rejected at this stage. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil