1 2026:CGHC:5607 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9963 of 2025 Surendra Kumar Berman S/o Ratan Lal Berman Aged About 28 Years R/o Vill. - Dhangaon, P.S. Pamgarh, District - Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Office, Police Station - Nawagarh, District - Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sachin Nidhi, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 31.01.2026 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. 253/2025 registered at Police Station - Nawagarh District – Janjgir- Champa (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 420 of IPC, and Section 66(C) of the I.T. Act, (correctly mention in charge- sheet as 66(c), 42(3)(e) of the telecommunication Act). VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.02.02 10:56:29 +0530 2 2. The prosecution story in brief is that On 04.06.2025, the Cyber Cell, Nawagarh received a complaint revealing that a POS outlet operating under POS Code No. 9630378340 in the name of Aakesh Mobile, situated at 80 Main Road, Bhatapara, District Janjgir-Champa, was fraudulently issuing mobile SIM cards by misusing the identity documents and photographs of various individuals. On the basis of this information, FIR in Crime No. 253/2025 was registered on the same day for offences punishable under Section 420 of the IPC and Section 66C of the Information Technology Act. During investigation, it was found that a total of 24 SIM cards were activated in the names of different persons who subsequently denied having purchased or used the said SIM cards, and several irregularities were noticed in the CAF forms. It further emerged that the accused Aakesh alias Akesh Kumar Sahu, in connivance with his associates Sanjay Kashyap, Piyush Pandey and Surendra Burman, had deceitfully activated the SIM cards on different dates. A mobile phone and a biometric device were seized from the possession of the main accused, who was arrested, while co-accused Surendra Burman was also formally taken into custody; however, another accused, Priyanshu Pandey, was found absconding and his property details could not be traced. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He also submits that one of the co-accused in the same crime has already been enlarged on bail by this Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 03.11.2025 passed in MCRC No. 4740/2025, and the said order constitutes a relevant ground of parity for consideration of the present applicant’s prayer for bail. It is further submitted that there is 3 an inordinate and unexplained delay in obtaining the final medical report from the hospital and, in the absence of conclusive medical evidence, the nature and gravity of the alleged injuries remain unsubstantiated, thereby rendering the prosecution case weak and prima facie doubtful at this stage. The applicant is a permanent resident of Village Dhangaon, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), having deep roots in society, and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses. It is further submitted that the applicant is the sole bread-earner of his family and that his continued incarceration would cause irreparable harm to his family and social life, while no useful purpose would be served by keeping him in custody any longer. Moreover, in view of the pendency of cases before the trial courts, the present trial is likely to take a considerable time for its final disposal, and therefore, continued detention of the applicant till conclusion of the trial would be unjust and contrary to the principles governing grant of bail, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case, and the applicant has one criminal antecedent, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, 4 and the fact that one of the co-accused in the same crime has already been enlarged on bail by this Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 03.11.2025 passed in MCRC No. 4740/2025, and further taking into account that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, the applicant has remained in judicial custody since 04.06.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant 7. Let the Applicant – Surendra Kumar Berman, involved in Crime No. 253/2025 registered at Police Station - Nawagarh District – Janjgir- Champa (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 420 of IPC, and Section 66(C) of the I.T. Act, (correctly mention in charge- sheet as 66(c), 42(3)(e) of the telecommunication 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 his 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 5 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. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Vaibhav