1 2025:CGHC:21469 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3572 of 2025 Rahul Sharma S/o Rakesh Sharma Aged About 21 Years R/o House No. Chn. 657, Street No. 27, Ward No. 14, Chandra Nagar, Kohka, Bhilai, Tahsil And Distt. Durg Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Mohan Nagar, Distt - Durg Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. P. Chetan Kumar, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Dy. Adv. General. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08/05/2025 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. 07/2025 registered at Police Station- Mohan Nagar District- Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318(4), 61(2)(a) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that as per secret information received from Bhartiya Cyber Apradh Samanvay Kendra (14C) an KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 FIR has been registered bearing No. 7/2025 as P.S. Mohan Nagar, against unknown 111 bank account holders in the branch of Karnatka Bank, situated at Station Road, Durg, District Durg (C.G.), the total amounting to Rs. 86,33,247/- has been transacted illegally, in order to earn profit. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the charges leveled against him just in order to harass him, applicant had no such bank accounts which can be operated as mule account nor his identity proof has been used with his consent to open any mule account in any of the bank branches to earn any kind of profit through illegal or unfair means. He further submits that the applicant does not have any bank account in any bank situated in the country, nor he owns any bank account from the 111 bank accounts mentioned in the charge sheet, just in order to fulfill the liability the police has falsely fabricated a case against applicant and further, the applicant is brilliant college going student, who is pursuing B.com and recently appeared in B.com final year exam and he is in jail since 28.01.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that from perusal of the case diary, it was found through the Coordination Portal operated by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, that a total of 111 account holders of 3 Karnataka Bank, Ground Floor, Join Hands, Station Road, Durg, had received approximately Rs. 86,33,247/- through various cyber frauds committed by numerous individuals from different states in India. It was observed that these 111 bank accounts were used to receive funds obtained through online fraud and illicit gain. Complaints regarding these accounts had been registered in other States. Based on the suspicion that these accounts were used for receiving online fraud amounts and generating illicit gains, and knowingly allowing the deposit of such funds, a case was registered against the 111 Karnataka Bank account holders under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318(4), and 61(2)(A) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for investigation. During the course of investigation, the co- accused Ranjay Singh and Aman Kumar were found to be involved in the crime and were arrested. Although no account of Karnataka Bank was seized from the applicant/accused Rahul Sharma, his involvement in the case is prima facie evident based on his memorandum statement and the seizure of SIM and screenshots. He further submits that the anticipatory bail application of the co- accused has already been rejected. Accordingly, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, recovery made from the applicant, period of detention of the applicant since 28.01.2025 and the fact that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent 4 Court and the applicant has no criminal antecedent further, the applicant does not have any bank account in any bank situated in the country, nor he owns any bank account from the 111 bank accounts mentioned in the charge-sheet, no further interrogation is required and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, without further commenting anything merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. Let the applicant – Rahul Sharma, involved in Crime No. 07/2025 registered at Police Station- Mohan Nagar District- Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318(4), 61(2)(a) of BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 sufficient 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, 5 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 applicant is 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 him in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. dorthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal