Saleem Khan S/o Late Shri Chirag Khan Aged About 34 Years R/o Nawagadi, Rajapara v. State of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Bastar, District - Bastar Chhattisgarh. --- Non
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:23914 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2980 of 2025 Saleem Khan S/o Late Shri Chirag Khan Aged About 34 Years R/o Nawagadi, Rajapara, Ward No. 10, Police Station - Kotwali, Raigarh, Distt - Raigarh Chhattisgarh. --- Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Bastar, District - Bastar Chhattisgarh. --- Non-Applicant along with MCRC No. 3090 of 2025
Legal Reasoning
Nakul Prasad Shrivastava S/o Late Shiv Kumar Shrivastava Aged About 38 Years R/o Dharampura No. 1, Jagdalpur, Parmanent R/o Village- Bhikharimal, Police Station- Chakradhar Nagar, Distt.- Raigarh, (C.G.) --- Applicant Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- S.H.O. Bastar, District - Bastar (C.G.) --- Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Keshav Dewangan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Deputy G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13.06.2025 1. The applicants have preferred these First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 40/2025, registered at Police Station : Bastar, District - RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 Bastar, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(2)(4), 336(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66-C of Information of Technology Act, 2000. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that as per directions issued by the Police Headquarters dated 06.02.2025, on 25.03.2025 Inspector Vikesh Tiwari of the Cyber Cell made a written complaint at Police Station Bastar for registration of an FIR against co- accused Nakul Prasad Shrivastava, stating that he, as a salesman of Vodafone Idea Telecom Company, committed cheating and forgery during the sale of SIM cards of the said company. Upon this complaint, the Sub-Inspector investigated the matter, arrested co- accused Nakul Prasad Shrivastava, and recorded his memorandum statement. In his statement, the co-accused disclosed that the present applicant and co-accused were working as Manager and Salesman in Vodafone Idea and that, during the sale of SIM cards, they obtained customers’ thumb impressions twice on the electronic machine and collected their Aadhaar cards. They allegedly misused the thumb impressions and Aadhaar details to issue additional SIM cards to other customers for cheating and forgery. Based on the memorandum statement, the police arrested the present applicant and registered an FIR against both accused under the aforesaid offences. The investigation is still ongoing. 3. Learned counsels for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent persons and have been falsely implicated in the aforesaid 3 case. He further submits that no offence under Sections 318(2)(4), 336(3) of B.N.S., 2023 is made out against the present applicant. On the date of the incident, the applicant was merely a salesman of Vodafone Idea, working in its ofÏce and selling SIM cards as per company instructions. No victim has lodged any complaint against the applicants or co-accused alleging misuse of documents or cheating. The accused persons were employees of Vodafone Idea, and after selling SIM cards, the applicants duly reported the same to his superior. He also submits that Section 318 of B.N.S. defines cheating as deceiving a person and causing harm or damage to body, mind, reputation, or property. Since no victim has alleged harm or lodged a complaint, this offence is not made out. Similarly, Section 336(3) B.N.S. is inapplicable as the electronic machine seized by the police was not proven to be used with intent to cause damage or injury. The offence under Section 66-C of the IT Act, 2000 is also not made out, as there is no evidence that the electronic device was used for hacking or for the purpose of cheating or forgery. He further submits that both the applicants have no any previous criminal antecedents and they are in jail since 29.03.2025, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he pray for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that the applicants committed cheating and forgery during the sale 4 of SIM cards of the said company, therefore, the applicants are not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, though the allegations is that the applicants committed cheating and forgery during the sale of SIM cards of the said company, but there is no evidence that the electronic device was used for hacking or for the purpose of cheating or forgery, further both the applicants have no any previous criminal antecedents and they are in jail since 29.03.2025, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, as such, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicants – Saleem Khan and Nakul Prasad Shrivastava, involved in Crime No. 40/2025, registered at Police Station : Bastar, District - Bastar, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(2)(4), 336(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66-C of Information of Technology Act, 2000, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 5 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 their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail 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 applicants 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 sufÏcient 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. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Rahul Dewangan Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice