[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
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
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.
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
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.
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
