1 CGHC010306902026 2026:CGHC:38904 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7384 of 2026 Manoj Dewangan S/o Vishnu Dewangan Aged About 29 Years R/o House No. 151 Ward No. 07, Prakashpur P.S. Khairagarh District- Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh (Through S.H.O. P.S. Range Cyber Police Thana, Raipur, Distt- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Shri Ravi Kumar Bodhani appearing through VC with Shri Ankush Soni, Advocates. For Non-Applicant : Shri SS Baghel, GA. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 02/09/2026 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.6/2024 registered at Police Station Range Cyber Police Thana, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Date: 2026.09.02 19:41:54 +0530 2 Sections 420 & 34 of the IPC. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that complainant Pramod Kumar Tripathi lodged a report with the concerned Police Station stating that the accused, by using various mobile numbers and bank accounts, induced him to transfer approximately Rs. 45 Lakh and thereby committed cheating. Accordingly, Crime No. 06/2024 was registered under section 420, 34 I.P.C. and investigation commenced. During investigation, it was revealed that mobile number 9516808557 and the alternate number 7772841884 were being used. The subscriber of one SIM stated that he had no knowledge of its use and that the SIM had been used by the accused. The accused was issued notice to produce the SIM and relevant records. However, he failed to produce any valid documents or information and did not cooperate with the investigation. The investigation further disclosed that the SIM was being used by the accused and that he was acting in conspiracy with other co-accused. On the basis of the victim's statement, Cyber Police Station Raipur lodged crime no.06/2024 under Sections 420 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code and arrested present applicant/accused on 07.07.2026. Hence the bail application. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime. The alleged incident pertains to the year 2024. The police never issued any notice to the applicant nor called him for investigation or interrogation. Instead, he was directly arrested and produced 3 before the court and has remained in Judicial Custody since 07/07/2027. The Cyber police Station Thana, Raipur has failed to comply with the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in- Arnesh Kumar Vs State Of Bihar 2014 (8) SCC 273, Satendra Kumar Antil Vs CBI, 2021 (10) SCC 51 and Criminal Appeal No. 2963/2025,Shailesh Kumar Singh @ Shailesh R. Singh Vs State Of U.P & Another. The alleged offence is punishable with imprisonment of less than Seven Years and the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents. Therefore, the arrest is contrary to the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It is submitted that the present applicant has only been implicated on the basis of doubts and assumptions and there is no substantive evidence against the present applicant. No fraudulent amount has been credited to the applicant's bank account. Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that in compliance of the order passed by this Court on 11.8.2026, the concerned I.O. has filed his personal affidavit and paras-5 to 9 of the said affidavit read thus:- “5.That, the case in brief is that, the complainant Pramod Kumar Tripathi, Resident of Tatibandh, Amanaka, Raipur has lodged a complaint before the concerned Police Station to the effect that, the holder of the accused Mobile Numbers 9462255567, 8358837687, 9516808557 and 8090923947 by telling the complainant that, he has become a Crorepati and made him deposit Rs. 45 Lacs in different mobile numbers and 4 different bank accounts, have committed the fraud with the complainant. On the basis of the complaint, the offence has been registered against the accused persons and the matter was taken into investigation. During the investigation, the details of the bank accounts of the aforesaid SIM numbers were obtained from the concerned service provider. 6. That, during the course of investigation, it was found that, on the date of incident, the complainant was given a call on the mobile number of the fraudster Mobile Number 951608557, which was found to be registered in the name of Suman Yadav, Resident of Village Salgapath, PS Chichola, PS Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon. The online financial cyber fraud has been committed with the complainant using the aforesaid mobile number. In this regard, when the statement of the holder of the said mobile number was recorded, she said that, the mobile number 9516808557 has never been used by her and she has never purchased nor used the said SIM number. She said that, she does not have any information about how and when the SIM was activated and who is using it. 7. That, during the investigation, it was revealed that, the present accused applicant who is Point of Sale Agent (PoS), activated the aforesaid SIM Card in violation of KYC and SIM Distribution rules set by the Telecom Company. Instead of providing the said activated SIM to the actual customer, the accused herein has made it available to other accused persons/cyber criminals. The PoS Agent who activated SIM Number 9516808557 from the service provider company is Manoj Dewangan i.e. the present accused applicant. 8.That, thereafter, during investigation, the POS Agent Manoj Dewangan who has activated the aforesaid mobile SIM number without knowledge of the original ID holder, was summoned and interrogated wherein, he has categorically deposed the fact that, he has activated the aforesaid SIM without the knowledge of Suman Yadav, holder of Mobile Number 9516808557, fraudulently abusing KYC and sold the said SIM 5 Card to his social media acquaintances for Rs. 1000/- with the intention of defrauding them. 9.That, the present accused Applicant has been arrested on 07.07.2026 by the police of Police Station Range Cyber, Raipur, in connection with Crime No. 06/2024, registered at Police Station Range Cyber, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) against the accused Applicant and other accused persons for the offence punishable under Sections 420 and 34 of the IPC and was sent on judicial remind.” and the charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant. Therefore, the bail application may be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that the charge sheet has already been submitted against the applicant, the applicant does not have any criminal antecedents, which is mentioned in the bail application, the applicant is in jail since 7.7.2026, further considering allegation against the applicant that he has only activated the subject SIM and conclusion of trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. Accordingly, the Application is allowed. 7. Let the Applicant – Manoj Dewangan, involved in Crime No.6/2024 registered at Police Station Range Cyber Police Thana, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 420 & 34 of the IPC, be released on bail on furnishing 6 personal bond with two 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 their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them 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 applicants are 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 them 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. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Barve