1 2025:CGHC:29974 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3878 of 2025 Suraj Diwan S/o Samaylal Diwan Aged About 31 Years Caste - Panika, R/o Vill. - Dhamni, Hasaud, P.S. - Hasaud, Distt. - Sakti (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, P.S. - Surajpur, District - Surajpur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Akhtar Hussain, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 02.07.2025 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. 150/2025 registered at Police Station Surajpur, District – Surajpur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 413, 120-B, of the Indian Penal Code and Section 317(4), 318(2), 61(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution story in a nutshell is that various victims had lodged ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.07.04 10:57:21 +0530 2 their complaints online on the portal operated by the Indian Cyber Cell after incidents of cyber fraud had occurred against them. During the investigation of these complaints, it was found that account number 60477170109 of the Bank of Maharashtra, which had been provided by the main accused, Anand Kumar Sahu, to the accused, Saurabh Sahu, in his name, was related to these complaints of online cyber fraud. Upon obtaining information and statements from the bank, proof of money transactions related to online cyber fraud was found, on the basis of which Crime No. 150/2025 under Sections 420, 413, 120-B, 317(4), 318(2), and 61(2) of the IPC was registered against the main accused, Anand Kumar Sahu, and an investigation was initiated. During the investigation, when accused Anand Kumar Sahu was questioned, he revealed that the masterminds, accused Saurabh Sahu and Aman Sahu, in collusion with criminals committing cyber fraud in different states, lured people known to them with promises of money and obtained multiple bank accounts from them, paying amounts ranging from Rs. 6,000/- to Rs. 12,000/- for each account. The concerned bank accounts were opened, and by obtaining the ATM cards and SIM cards linked to the mobile numbers associated with these accounts, relevant information was provided to members of the cyber fraud gang, enabling them to obtain financial benefits through illegal means. During the investigation, the present applicant was also shown to be a major mastermind in this entire cyber crime. It was found that an amount of Rs. 35,65,170/- received from various victims of cyber fraud, had been transacted through the bank accounts of the applicant. Information regarding the cyber fraud offences was also shared with the police of the concerned states in relation to the 3 arrested accused, and further action was taken to trace and apprehend other accused involved in the crime. At first glance, it appears that the case is still at the investigation stage, and the investigation is ongoing regarding the involvement of the accused in cyber fraud offences committed in other states. During the investigation, the accused was arrested by the concerned police officials. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that no act has been committed by the applicant/accused which attracts the application of the above-mentioned sections against him, and there is no evidence to support the allegations in the present case. He further submits that the ingredients of the alleged offences are not attracted against the applicant, and no purpose would be served in keeping the applicant behind bars. He also submits that the allegations levelled against the applicant are triable by a Magistrate, and considering the nature of the allegations, the present applicant is only a co-accused and not the main accused in this case. The allegations of the prosecution are bailable in nature, and therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required. He submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 24.03.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the present applicant has been alleged to be a major mastermind in the entire cyber crime case, and it is further alleged that an amount of Rs. 35,65,170/-, 4 received from various victims of cyber fraud, was transacted through the bank accounts of the applicant, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and further the fact that the present applicant has been alleged to be a major mastermind in the entire cyber crime case, and it is further alleged that an amount of Rs. 35,65,170/-, received from various victims of cyber fraud, was transacted through the bank accounts of the applicant, therefore, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant - Suraj Diwan, involved in Crime No. 150/2025 registered at Police Station Surajpur, District – Surajpur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 413, 120-B, of the Indian Penal Code and Section 317(4), 318(2), 61(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek