The court granted regular bail in a cyber fraud case, ruling that since the charge sheet was filed and the trial was unlikely to conclude soon due to the slow pace of witness examination, continued detention was not justified.

ORDER

1. The Applicant has filed this Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for enlarging the Applicant on Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11201018240012 of 2024 registered with CID Cyber Crime Police Station, Gandhinagar.

2. Heard learned Advocate for the Applicant and learned APP for the Respondent – State.

Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the Respondent - State.

3. Learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that the Applicant has good reputation in the society and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in jail for indefinite period. It is further contended that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions that may be imposed by this Court if released on bail.

4. Per contra, learned APP has opposed the present application for grant of regular bail contending that the present is a case of cyber fraud wherein the present applicant is actively involved. The present applicant had carried the SIM card procured from India to Dubai. Moreover, the applicant was also in contact with the other co-accused who belong to Pakistan. Learned APP has therefore submitted that looking to the nature of offence, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant and the Application may be dismissed.

5. Heard learned Advocates for the parties and perused the record. The investigation is over and charge sheet is filed. Investigation is over and charge sheet is filed. The applicant has been arrested in connection with the present offence on 27.10.2024, and since then he is in custody. The prosecution has cited as many as 58 witnesses in the charge sheet, out of them as reported, only one witness has been examined till date. Therefore, there is no likelihood of conclusion of trial in the near future.

6. It is the case of prosecution against the present applicant that he had procured a SIM card from India and had carried this very same SIM card to Dubai, and the said SIM card was used for commission of the offence in question. Considering this aspect, the Application deserves consideration. This court has also considered the following aspects:

(a) As per catena of decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, there are mainly 3 factors which are required to be considered by this court i.e. prima facie case, availability of Applicant accused at the time of trial and tampering and hampering with the witnesses by the accused.

(b) That the learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that the Applicant Accused is not likely to flee away.

(c) That the Applicant is in custody since 27.10.2024.

(d) The law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. C.B.I. Reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40.

7. Having heard the learned Advocates for the parties and perusing the record produced in this case as well as taking into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, gravity of accusation, availability of the Applicant Accused at the time of Trial etc. and the role attributed to the present Applicant accused, the present Application deserves to be allowed and accordingly stands allowed. This Court has also gone through the FIR and police papers and also the earlier order passed by the learned Sessions Court where the learned Sessions Judge has disallowed the bail Application at initial stage. The Applicant Accused is ordered to be released on bail in connection with the aforesaid FIR on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court,