1 CGHC010335482026 2026:CGHC:38642 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8083 of 2026 1 - Om Kodvale S/o Tukaram Kodvale, Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Sevte Thana Pandharpur, District Solapur Maharashtra, 2 - Shivam Pandey S/o Shri Dilip Pandey Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Nibhi, Thana Karchana District Prayagraj ( Uttar Pradesh)----Present- R/o Mahavir Nagar Super Steel Colony House No. C- 13, P. S. Telibandha, Raipur C. G. 3 - Mohammad Gufaran Hussain S/o Shri Ramhat Alli Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Bhesna, Post Katehati, Thana Sangipur, District Pratapgarh ( Uttar Pradesh) ----Presently R/o Gandhi Nagar Near Pani, Tanki, Amlidih, P. S. New Rajendra, Nagar Raipur C. G. ... Applicants versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Ganj Raipur Commissionerate, Revenue, District Raipur C. G. ...Non-applicant For Applicants : Shri Hari Agrawal, Advocate. For State/Non-applicant : Shri Sumit Singh, Dy. A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 01.09.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya NIKITA JAIN Digitally signed by NIKITA JAIN Date: 2026.09.01 17:38:26 +0530 2 Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.0083/2026 registered at Police Station – Ganj, Raipur Commissionerate, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 61(2), 112(2), 316(2), 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 337, 338 and 340(2) of B.N.S and Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of IT Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on receiving information from an informant regarding operation of an illegal call centre at the second and third floors of Pithaliya Complex, Subhash Nagar, Raipur, the police party reached the spot and found several persons working on computers and laptops. The applicants were allegedly found present and working at the said premises. It is alleged that the call centre was being operated by several persons under the name and style of Rockland Business Solution Pvt. Ltd., wherein US-based citizens were contacted on the pretext of arranging loans and were deceived by giving false assurances regarding improvement of credit scores and easy availability of loans. It is further alleged that, pursuant to an organised conspiracy, fake cheques were generated in the names of US citizens and money was obtained through banks by deception. It is also alleged that fake arrest warrants were issued and the victims were threatened and pressurised by using the expression “digital arrest” to obtain money from them. Consequently, the report was lodged and crime was registered. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed in this case. It is further 3 submitted that as many as 20 witnesses have been cited by the prosecution, but none of them has been examined so far. The applicants are in jail since 25.03.2026 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the allegations against the applicants are serious in nature and relate to an organised cyber fraud/call-centre operation in which US-based citizens were allegedly cheated. It is further submitted that the applicants were found involved in the alleged illegal call centre and, therefore, considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, they are not entitled to the benefit of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicants and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case, the prosecution has cited 20 witnesses, and admittedly, none of the witnesses has been examined till date, the applicants are in jail since 25.03.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicants - Om Kodvale, Shivam Pandey and Mohammad Gufran involved in Crime No. 0083/2026 registered at Police Station – Ganj, Raipur Commissionerate, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 61(2), 112(2), 316(2), 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 337, 338 and 340(2) of 4 B.N.S and Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of IT Act be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties (each) 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 applicants 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 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 their 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 them, 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 5 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 them in accordance with law. 8. It is further made clear that if any of the absconding accused is not arrested, the trial against the present applicants shall not be held up or delayed on that account. The learned Trial Court shall proceed with the trial against the present applicants in accordance with law, without awaiting the arrest or production of the absconding accused. 9. 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 Nikita