Order on Board

1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 228/2025 registered at Police Station- Devendra Nagar, Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 43, 66 of Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 336(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita , (BNS).

2. The prosecution's case, in brief, is that the applicant was an employee of the complainant. It is alleged that during the course of his employment with the complainant’s company, the applicant hacked the company’s ofÏcial email ID and gained access to its confidential information. It is further alleged that the applicant prepared a false experience certificate and a relieving order on the company’s letterhead and emailed the same to himself. Consequently, Crime No. 228/2025 was registered against the applicant for offence under Sections 43 and 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and Section 336(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, as he has not played any role in the alleged offence and the charges are not prima facie made out against him. It is submitted that the applicant, a young and educated person, joined the complainant company, Career Tronics Global Services Pvt. Ltd., as a Project Executive on 01.07.2025 on a monthly salary of ₹18,000/–, but he was not paid his full salary and received no payment from October 2025 to 11.11.2025, due to which he resigned and informed the company through email. Despite repeated demands, his lawful dues were not paid and his calls were avoided, compelling him to approach the police on 12.11.2025. It is further submitted that on 15.11.2025, during a police intervention for settlement, the complainant allegedly forced the applicant to bring his laptop and mobile phone to the police station, where they were tampered with, which was duly reported to the police. Thereafter, the present FIR was lodged on false allegations of email hacking and preparation of forged documents. It is also submitted that the applicant obtained information from the Ministry of Corporate Affairs showing that the complainant operates several companies, some inactive, allegedly for tax evasion and that complaints regarding unfair investigation have also been made by the applicant’s father to senior police ofÏcials, but no action has been taken. There is no allegation that the applicant derived any undue benefit from the alleged documents and in absence of substantive evidence, his continued detention would be unjustified and would cause undue hardship, therefore, the applicant deserves to be released on bail.

4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature, involving unauthorized access to official email, misuse of confidential company data and preparation of forged documents, which constitute offences under the Information Technology Act as well as relevant provisions of law, therefore, considering the gravity of the offence and the material available in the case diary, the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail.

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

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, after hearing learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the case diary and material available on record, this Court finds that a