MANOJ DEWANGAN vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010306902026 2026:CGHC:38904
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 7384 of 2026
Manoj Dewangan S/o Vishnu Dewangan Aged About 29 Years R/o
House No. 151 Ward No. 07, Prakashpur P.S. Khairagarh District-
Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh (Through S.H.O. P.S. Range Cyber Police Thana,
Raipur, Distt- Raipur (C.G.)
... Non-Applicant
For Applicant : Shri Ravi Kumar Bodhani appearing through
VC with Shri Ankush Soni, Advocates.
For Non-Applicant : Shri SS Baghel, GA.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice
Order on Board
02/09/2026
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.6/2024 registered at Police Station Range Cyber Police
Thana, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under
Digitally
signed by
KRISHNA
KUMAR
BARVE
Date:
2026.09.02
19:41:54
+0530
KRISHNA
KUMAR
BARVE

2
Sections 420 & 34 of the IPC.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that complainant Pramod Kumar
Tripathi lodged a report with the concerned Police Station stating
that the accused, by using various mobile numbers and bank
accounts, induced him to transfer approximately Rs. 45 Lakh and
thereby committed cheating. Accordingly, Crime No. 06/2024 was
registered under section 420, 34 I.P.C. and investigation
commenced. During investigation, it was revealed that mobile
number 9516808557 and the alternate number 7772841884 were
being used. The subscriber of one SIM stated that he had no
knowledge of its use and that the SIM had been used by the
accused. The accused was issued notice to produce the SIM and
relevant records. However, he failed to produce any valid
documents or information and did not cooperate with the
investigation. The investigation further disclosed that the SIM was
being used by the accused and that he was acting in conspiracy
with other co-accused. On the basis of the victim's statement,
Cyber Police Station Raipur lodged crime no.06/2024 under
Sections 420 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code and arrested present
applicant/accused on 07.07.2026. Hence the bail application.
3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the
applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime.
The alleged incident pertains to the year 2024. The police never
issued any notice to the applicant nor called him for investigation
or interrogation. Instead, he was directly arrested and produced

3
before the court and has remained in Judicial Custody since
07/07/2027. The Cyber police Station Thana, Raipur has failed to
comply with the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in- Arnesh Kumar Vs State Of Bihar 2014 (8) SCC 273,
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs CBI, 2021 (10) SCC 51 and Criminal
Appeal No. 2963/2025,Shailesh Kumar Singh @ Shailesh R.
Singh Vs State Of U.P & Another. The alleged offence is
punishable with imprisonment of less than Seven Years and the
applicant has no previous criminal antecedents. Therefore, the
arrest is contrary to the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court. It is submitted that the present applicant has only been
implicated on the basis of doubts and assumptions and there is no
substantive evidence against the present applicant. No fraudulent
amount has been credited to the applicant's bank account.
Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non-
applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that in
compliance of the order passed by this Court on 11.8.2026, the
concerned I.O. has filed his personal affidavit and paras-5 to 9 of
the said affidavit read thus:-
“ 5 .That, the case in brief is that, the complainant
Pramod Kumar Tripathi, Resident of Tatibandh,
Amanaka, Raipur has lodged a complaint before
the concerned Police Station to the effect that, the
holder of the accused Mobile Numbers
9462255567, 8358837687, 9516808557 and
8090923947 by telling the complainant that, he
has become a Crorepati and made him deposit
Rs. 45 Lacs in different mobile numbers and

4
different bank accounts, have committed the fraud
with the complainant. On the basis of the
complaint, the offence has been registered
against the accused persons and the matter was
taken into investigation. During the investigation,
the details of the bank accounts of the aforesaid
SIM numbers were obtained from the concerned
service provider.
6 . That, during the course of investigation, it was
found that, on the date of incident, the
complainant was given a call on the mobile
number of the fraudster Mobile Number
951608557, which was found to be registered in
the name of Suman Yadav, Resident of Village
Salgapath, PS Chichola, PS Khairagarh, District
Rajnandgaon. The online financial cyber fraud
has been committed with the complainant using
the aforesaid mobile number. In this regard, when
the statement of the holder of the said mobile
number was recorded, she said that, the mobile
number 9516808557 has never been used by her
and she has never purchased nor used the said
SIM number. She said that, she does not have
any information about how and when the SIM was
activated and who is using it.
7 . That, during the investigation, it was revealed
that, the present accused applicant who is Point
of Sale Agent (PoS), activated the aforesaid SIM
Card in violation of KYC and SIM Distribution
rules set by the Telecom Company. Instead of
providing the said activated SIM to the actual
customer, the accused herein has made it
available to other accused persons/cyber
criminals. The PoS Agent who activated SIM
Number 9516808557 from the service provider
company is Manoj Dewangan i.e. the present
accused applicant.
8 .That, thereafter, during investigation, the POS
Agent Manoj Dewangan who has activated the
aforesaid mobile SIM number without knowledge
of the original ID holder, was summoned and
interrogated wherein, he has categorically
deposed the fact that, he has activated the
aforesaid SIM without the knowledge of Suman
Yadav, holder of Mobile Number 9516808557,
fraudulently abusing KYC and sold the said SIM

5
Card to his social media acquaintances for Rs.
1000/- with the intention of defrauding them.
9 .That, the present accused Applicant has been
arrested on 07.07.2026 by the police of Police
Station Range Cyber, Raipur, in connection with
Crime No. 06/2024, registered at Police Station
Range Cyber, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
against the accused Applicant and other accused
persons for the offence punishable under
Sections 420 and 34 of the IPC and was sent on
judicial remind.”
and the charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant.
Therefore, the bail application may be rejected.
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,
and the fact that the charge sheet has already been submitted
against the applicant, the applicant does not have any criminal
antecedents, which is mentioned in the bail application, the
applicant is in jail since 7.7.2026, further considering allegation
against the applicant that he has only activated the subject SIM
and conclusion of trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of
the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the
present case. Accordingly, the Application is allowed .
7. Let the Applicant – Manoj Dewangan, involved in Crime
No.6/2024 registered at Police Station Range Cyber Police
Thana, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under
Sections 420 & 34 of the IPC, be released on bail on furnishing

6
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 their counsel. In case of his absence,
without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed
against them 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
applicants are 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 them 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.
-

Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Barve