The court granted bail based on the return of defrauded money and the applicant's lack of prior criminal history, emphasizing the need for expeditious trial.

Order on Board

1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 145/2024 registered at Police Station Dallirajhara, District- Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 477 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66 D of Information Technology Act.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that is charged with cheating the complainant of Rs. 24,92,200/- between 17.02.2024 to 06.05.2024.

The accused allegedly made calls to the complainant's mobile number from his own mobile, posing as an ofÏcial from the Head Branch, Mumbai, and claimed that the complainant had outstanding RBI charges, GST charges, and income tax. He threatened that if the amounts were not deposited, the complainant's account balance would be transferred to the government account. The accused then instructed the complainant to transfer the amount to his account through Google Pay. Thereafter, the offence has been registered against the applicant.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that the said transferred money has already been returned to the complainant on Supurdnama and the applicant has no role in this crime, only his account was used for the transaction, but he was not aware of the said fraud otherwise he would use or utilize the money. He also submits that the applicant is aged about 19 years and he is a farmer carrying all the responsibility of his family. The applicant is in jail since 28.06.2024, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant has fraudulently taken Rs.24,92,200/- from the complainant by saying that the complainant has not deposited the outstanding RBI charges, GST charges, and income tax, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail.

5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 28.06.2024, the fact that the allegation against the applicant is that he has fraudulently taken Rs.24,92,200/- from the complainant by saying that the complainant has not deposited the outstanding RBI charges, GST charges, and income tax, but the said transferred money has already been returned to the complainant on Supurdnama and also the applicant has no criminal antecedent, further the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

7. Let the Applicant-Sonu Kumar, involved in Crime No. 145/2024 registered at Police Station Dallirajhara, District- Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 477 of IPC and Section 66 D of I.T. Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two local 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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of B