Chattisgarh High Court
Dwarika Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 10 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:11475
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2153 of 2026
Dwarika Sahu S/o Late Dilip Sahu Aged About 24 Years R/o Dak Bangla
Road, Firangi Para, Kota, P.S. And Tahsil- Kota, District- Bilaspur (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S.- Kota, District-
Bilaspur (C.G.)
... Non-Applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Priyanshu Gupta, Advocate
For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Deputy Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
10.03.2026
1.This is the Third Bail Application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 645/2025 registered at Police Station - Kota, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(C) of I.T. Act.
2. The earlier bail applications of the applicant being MCRC Nos.
7785/2025 and 6798/2025 were rejected by this Court vide orders RAHUL DEWANGAN dated 11.12.2025 and 28.08.2025 respectively on merits with liberty Digitally signed by to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. RAHUL DEWANGAN 2
3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a complaint was lodged at Kota Police Station by the complainant Karim Mohammad, who submitted a written report stating that he works at Aama Dukan, Kota, and that he came to know that the POS agent of Dwarika Mobile Shop had misused his personal documents and identity to fraudulently obtain an Airtel SIM card bearing mobile number 7024161758 in his name and was using the same himself. It was further alleged that the said SIM card issued in the complainant's name was being used for fraudulent activities to obtain money and derive wrongful financial benefits, and on the basis of the said written complaint the police registered the aforesaid crime against the applicant/accused.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the earlier bail applications of the applicant was rejected by this Court on merit with a direction to conclude the trial expeditiously and the applicant is in jail since 24.06.2025 and charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court. He further submits that out of 03 prosecution witnesses, only 01 has been examined and not supported the prosecution case and turned hostile. He further submits that the applicant has one previous criminal antecedent, in which he has been granted bail by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the present applicant.
5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant.
3
6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.
7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that this is the third bail application and the earlier bail applications of the applicant were rejected on merits with a direction to conclude the trial expeditiously and as per the status of the trial, only one witness has been examined till date and not supported the case of the prosecution and turned hostile, further the applicant has one previous criminal antecedent in which he is on bail and he is in jail since 24.06.2025 and charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
8. Accordingly, the third bail application of the applicant is allowed.
Let the Applicant - Dwarika Sahu, involved in Crime No. 645/2025 registered at Police Station - Kota, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(C) of I.T. Act, be released on bail on furnishing 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 4 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 his counsel. In case of her 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.5
9. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible within a period of four months from the receipt of certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment.
10. 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 Rahul Dewangan