1 2025:CGHC:48108 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4834 of 2025 Mohmmad Kalam S/o Mohammad Kurban Aged About 20 Years R/o Shastri Nagar, Behind Graveyard, Camp 1, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Bhilai Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Jitendra Gupta, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Supriya Upasane, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 18.09.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 235/2025 registered at Police Station- Bhilai Nagar, District Durg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 318(4) and 61(2)(A) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the applicant was involved in a cyber fraud case, wherein multiple bank accounts were used to facilitate fraudulent transactions totaling Rs. 11,50,000/-. Based on RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 this allegation, an FIR was registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that no offence is made out against the applicant as he has no bank account in his name, nor has he been involved in any financial transaction related to the alleged cyber fraud. It is further submitted that nothing has been seized from his possession, indicating his lack of involvement in the offence. Moreover, co- accused persons, namely Vipin Shukla and Sameer Verma, have already been granted regular bail by the learned trial Court, and on the same footing, the applicant also deserves to be released on bail. it is further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 26.05.2025, charge-sheet has already been filed, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that in the present case, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch, received information from the Police Headquarters regarding several suspicious bank accounts with heavy fraudulent transactions. During investigation, it was found that accounts in the names of Sameer Verma and Vipin Shukla were involved in these transactions. Their memorandum statements revealed that they had opened the accounts on the instructions of the present applicant, Mohammad Kalam, and were paid Rs. 3 8,000/- each. Based on these statements, the applicant’s memorandum was recorded, wherein he stated that he was influenced by co-accused Anand Sao and Sameer to get the accounts opened and later handed over the documents like passbooks and ATMs to Anand Sao. It is alleged that the applicant is the mastermind behind the offence and that the organized crime was committed under his directions. 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 26.05.2025, the fact that though the present applicant’s role is limited to paying Rs. 8,000/- each to co-accused Sameer Verma and Vipin Shukla for getting bank accounts opened and subsequently handing over the account documents, But the said act was attributed to co-accused Anand Sao, who is alleged to be the mastermind of the entire offence and is presently absconding, further the case of present applicant is distinguishable from that of the co-accused, namely Anand Sao, who committed the said act, further the co-accused persons, namely Vipin Shukla and Sameer Verma, have already been granted regular bail by the learned trial Court, 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 the Applicant – Mohmmad Kalam, involved in Crime No. 235/2025 registered at Police Station- Bhilai Nagar, District Durg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 318(4) and 61(2)(A) of Bharatiya Nyaya 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 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, 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 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 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