1 2025:CGHC:7083 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 435 of 2025 Arun Kumar Sinha S/o Abhay Ram Sinha Aged About 26 Years R/o Ward No. 3, Aamapara, Jhargaon, P.O. Petlakoti, P.S. Devbhog, District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh. Presently At Kamal Vihar Sector - 4, I Block, Flat No. 831, Welfare Society, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Telibandha, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Deputy A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 07.02.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 578/2024, registered at Police Station : Telibandha, District - Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Naveen Kumar, lodged a written complaint at Police Station Telibandha, RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN Date: 2025.02.07 18:27:39 +0530 2 Raipur, stating that he is a Chartered Accountant. On 21.07.2024, persons, namely Ritu Vohra and Madhu Shah added him to a WhatsApp group where share market-related posts were shared. In his complaint, he alleged that Ajay Garg, the group’s admin, along with Vinit Gupta, Sukhwinder Singh Sindhu, and Madhu Shah, defrauded him of Rs. 1,39,15,000/- between 25.07.2024 and 13.08.2024 by having him deposit amounts into various bank accounts through cyber fraud. The police conducted an investigation and arrested the present applicant on 04.12.2024 on suspicion of an alleged transaction of Rs. 20,000/- in his bank account. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in case by the police even he has not been named as accused in the alleged FIR registered by the complainant. He further submits that the present applicant has been falsely named as an accused in the present offence solely based on a transaction in his account. It is pertinent to submit that UPI is a widely used payment method across the country, and individuals often use their UPI for making and accepting payments at various places. Therefore, in this case, it is possible that an amount was transferred to someone’s account using a UPI QR code without their knowledge. The present applicant was unaware of the transaction that occurred. He also submits that upon becoming aware of the transaction, he returned the amount to the complainant, as evidenced by the copy of the No Objection Certificate (NOC) cum afÏdavit dated 10.12.2024, provided by the 3 complainant, Naveen Kumar. He further submits that the present applicant has no previous criminal antecedent and the applicant is in jail since 04.12.2024 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the non- applicant/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the present applicant along with other co-accused persons defrauded the complainant of Rs. 1,39,15,000/- between 25.07.2024 and 13.08.2024 by having him deposit amounts into various bank accounts through cyber fraud, 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 04.12.2024, the fact that the present applicant has been falsely named as an accused in the present offence solely based on a transaction in his account, he was unaware of the transaction that occurred and upon becoming aware of the transaction, he returned the amount to the complainant, as evidenced by the copy of the No Objection Certificate (NOC) cum afÏdavit dated 10.12.2024, provided by the complainant, Naveen Kumar, further the applicant has no criminal antecedent and 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. 4 7. Let applicant, Arun Kumar Sinha, involved in Crime No. 578/2024, registered at Police Station : Telibandha, District - Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing 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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him 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, 5 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 applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan