1 2026:CGHC:3403 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 736 of 2026 Dipanshu Sahu S/o Devi Prasad Sahu Aged About 19 Years R/o Kargi Road, Kota, Tehsil and P.S. Kota, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Kota, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Chandrikaditya Pandey, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 20.01.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 183/2025 registered at Police Station – Kota, District- Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 316(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(C)of Information Technology Act, 2000. 2. As per the prosecution story, is that the complainant, Deepak Puri Goswami, visited Police Station Kota on 02.03.2025 and submitted a written complaint for registration of an FIR. In his complaint, he stated that he came to know that one Anshu Srivas, an agent of a mobile shop at PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.01.21 13:37:31 +0530 2 Patharra, Ganiyari, had fraudulently used his personal documents and identity cards to obtain Airtel SIM/mobile numbers 6263016287 and 8109714387 in his name and was using the same. He further alleged that the accused was similarly misusing the identity cards of Om Puri, Deepak Puri, Dushyant Kaiwart, Manmohan Puri, Sukhchand Puri, and other villagers to fraudulently procure and use mobile SIM cards in their names. Upon submission of the complaint, Police Station Kota registered a case against the accused under Crime No. 183/2025 for offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), and 316(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 66(c) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that co-accused persons of this case have been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC Nos. 2626/2025, 3492/2025, 3685/2025, 3913/2025 vide order dated 20.05.2025, and MCRC Nos. 4046/2025, 4968/2025, 7639/2025 vide order dated 10.06.2025, 23.07.2025, 30.10.2025, respectively and one of the co-accused person have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in MCRCA No. 892/2025 vide order dated 23.06.2025, further the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant has three previous criminal antecedents which are pending, further the applicant is in jail since 25.02.2025 (formally arrested on 28.04.2025 in the present case). Hence, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present bail application. She further submits that the applicant has three previous criminal antecedents, hence, the applicant is not entitled for 3 grant of bail. 5. I have Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material 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 fact that co-accused persons of this case have been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC Nos. 2626/2025, 3492/2025, 3685/2025, 3913/2025 vide order dated 20.05.2025, and MCRC Nos. 4046/2025, 4968/2025, 7639/2025 vide order dated 10.06.2025, 23.07.2025, 30.10.2025, respectively and one of the co-accused person have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in MCRCA No. 892/2025 vide order dated 23.06.2025, further the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant has three previous criminal antecedents which are pending and he is in jail since 25.02.2025, (formally arrested on 28.04.2025 in the present case), the conclusion of the trial is likely to take sometime, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let applicant - Dipanshu Sahu involved in Crime No. 183/2025 registered at Police Station – Kota, District- Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 316(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(C)of Information Technology Act, 2000, be released on bail on their furnishing a 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 4 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 him 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 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti