[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Kaushal Kumar Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 25 February, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:9844
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 1906 of 2026
Kaushal Kumar Singh S/o Virendra Prasad Singh Aged About 35 Years R/o-
Plot No. 2, Ward No. 14, Near Jankalyan Hospital, Housing Board, Jamul,
Bhilai, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh
... Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The DM, District - Durg (C.G.)
---- Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Bennoon, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. G.A.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
25.02.2026
1.
The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section
483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of
Digitally
RAJSHEKHAR signed by regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.
SONI RAJSHEKHAR
SONI
640/2025, registered at Police Station - Chawni, District - Durg (C.G.)
for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2) of the BNS
and Section 42(3)(e) of Telecommunications Act, 2023.
2. The case of the prosecution, is that the complainant, Mohammad
Nazim Khan s/o Mohammad Sabir Khan, aged 21 years, resident of
Shastri Nagar Camp-01, Bhilai, Chhavni Police Station, appeared at
the police station on 17.12.2025 and submitted a written application
stating that in August 2025, he went to Siddhi Vinayak Mobile Shop to
purchase a mobile SIM. There, his Aadhaar card and live photo were
taken from his mobile. Claiming the server was down, they did not
issue the SIM immediately but later provided him with an Airtel SIM
number 8349772055. Subsequently, he learned that in his name,
without his knowledge and by keeping him deceived, another SIM
number 8359085339 was issued on 23.08.2025 and SIM number
7089488534 on 26.08.2025, which were given to someone else. An
offense was registered on the application, and investigation was taken
up. Hence, this application.
3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and there is only
one criminal antecedent registered against the present applicant. It is
further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The
applicant is in jail since 17.12.2025 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 there is one criminal antecedent
registered against the present applicant, the charge-sheet has been
filed in this case, and the applicant is not entitled for grant of 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 applicant and the
fact that there is only one criminal antecedents registered against the
present applicant, charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant,
the applicant is in jail since 17.12.2025 and conclusion of the trial is
likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application.
7. Let applicant, Kaushal Kumar Singh, involved in Crime No. 640/2025,
registered at Police Station - Chawni, District - Durg (C.G.) for the
offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 319(2) of the BNS and
Section 42(3)(e) of Telecommunications Act, 2023, be released on bail
on his 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 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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court
concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Rajshekhar
