1 2026:CGHC:916 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10392 of 2025 Abhesh Kumar S/o Shri Lakhan Das Aged About 20 Years R/o Village- Chofala Niche Tola, Police Station- Chandramandih, District- Jamui, (Bihar) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Khadganwa, District- Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Hemant Kumar Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07.01.2026 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. 302/2024 registered at Police Station - Khadganwa, District- Manendragarh- Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 66, 66 D of Information and Technology Act. 2. As per the prosecution story, the complainant, Suraj Lal Singh, submitted a written complaint before the police station stating that on 05.12.2024, an unknown call was received from mobile number 9508400484 on his mobile number 9977239874. The caller informed him that his Jio number needed to be upgraded from 4G to 5G for proper functioning. As per the PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.01.08 12:48:29 +0530 2 caller’s instructions, the complainant pressed button No. 1. Thereafter, another call was received from the same mobile number, during which the caller stated that the upgrade from 4G to 5G had been successfully completed and that the complainant’s mobile phone would remain inactive for 24 hours and would then start working automatically. Subsequently, when the complainant visited his Central Bank, he came to know that an amount of Rs.9,07,012/- had been fraudulently deducted from his bank account bearing No. 2358113526. Accordingly, an FIR was registered against the unknown holder of mobile number 9508400484. The accused was arrested on 13.01.2025. After completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. 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 although the first bail application was dismissed on merits by this Court vide order dated 16.06.2025 passed in MCRC No. 4502/2025, the applicant has been languishing in jail since 13.01.2025, i.e., for more than one year. It is further submitted that, so far as the trial is concerned, charges were framed against the applicant on 18.09.2025; however, thereafter, the witnesses have not appeared before the trial Court. It is also submitted that the co-accused, namely Rajesh Das, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 07.05.2025 passed in MCRC No. 3442/2025. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed, and he has no previous criminal antecedents. Therefore, learned counsel prays that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed. He further submits that although the first bail application was dismissed on merits by this Court vide order dated 16.06.2025 passed in MCRC No. 4502/2025, the co- 3 accused, namely Rajesh Das, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 07.05.2025 passed in MCRC No. 3442/2025, on the ground that no money was received in his account, whereas an amount of Rs.9,07,012/- is alleged to have been credited to the applicant’s account. Hence, 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 facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity of allegation made against the applicant and the fact that the applicant although the first bail application was dismissed on merits by this Court vide order dated 16.06.2025 passed in MCRC No. 4502/2025, the applicant has been languishing in jail since 13.01.2025, i.e., for more than one year, so far as the trial is concerned, charges were framed against the applicant on 18.09.2025; however, thereafter, the witnesses have not appeared before the trial Court, further the co-accused, namely Rajesh Das, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 07.05.2025 passed in MCRC No. 3442/2025, on the ground that no money was received in his account, whereas an amount of Rs.9,07,012/- is alleged to have been credited to the applicant’s account, further the charge-sheet has already been filed, and he has no previous criminal antecedents, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Accordingly, the Second bail application is allowed. Let the applicant - Abhesh Kumar, involved in Crime No. 302/2024 registered at Police Station - Khadganwa, District- Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 66, 66 D of Information and Technology Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- 4 (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 their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of BNS. (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 BNS. (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. However, this Court hope and trust that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti