Regular bail granted where no prima facie evidence establishes direct fraud in unauthorized SIM card issuance.

The applicant, a 28-year-old Point of Sales (POS) operator and distributor for a telecom company, was arrested on December 8, 2025, in connection with Crime No. 442/2025

Following a report from the Cyber Police Headquarters, it was alleged that 48 fake SIM cards were fraudulently issued from the applicant’s shop, "Gupta Telecom," by misusing the identity documents and photographs of unsuspecting individuals

These SIM cards were allegedly utilized for cybercrimes committed both within India and from abroad

The applicant contended that he followed standard digital KYC and biometric verification procedures and that no incriminating material was recovered from his possession

The charge-sheet has been filed, and the applicant has remained in judicial custody since his arrest

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for the offence of cheating under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita

Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which provides the High Court with the power to grant regular bail

Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, which pertains to cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property

The court also relied on established bail jurisprudence regarding the assessment of prima facie evidence, the absence of criminal antecedents, and the impact of prolonged pre-trial incarceration

The Court observed that while the prosecution alleged a fraudulent scheme, there was no prima facie material presented to establish that the applicant directly committed the fraud

The court noted that the applicant appeared to be working in the ordinary course of his duties following prescribed company procedures for SIM activation

Significant weight was given to the fact that no incriminating material or recovery was made from the applicant’s possession and that the prosecution's case relied on statements that remained to be tested during the trial

Furthermore, the court considered that the applicant had no prior criminal record, the investigation was complete with the charge-sheet filed, and he had already been incarcerated for over three months

Under these circumstances, the court reasoned that the conclusion of the trial would take a considerable amount of time, making continued detention unnecessary

The Court allowed the bail application and directed the release of the applicant on a personal bond with two sureties

The release was made subject to several conditions: the applicant must not seek adjournments when witnesses are present [para. 7(i)], must attend all trial dates [para. 7(ii)], and must be present for the framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 of the BNSS [para. 7(iv)]. Any abuse of liberty would allow the trial court to initiate proceedings under Section 209 or 269 of the BNS