1 2025:CGHC:35856 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5792 of 2025 1. Satish Ajay S/o Shri Sewak Ram Ajay Aged About 41 Years R/o Village- Andola, Police Station- Kosir, District- Sarangarh- Bhilaigarh C.G. 2. Anjali Ajay W/o Satish Ajay Aged About 41 Years R/o Village- Andola, Police Station- Kosir, District- Sarangarh-Bhilaigarh C.G. ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Surajpur, District Surajpur C.G. ... Respondent For Applicant(s) : Mr. Surfaraj Khan, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Somya Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 24.07.2025 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 150/2025, registered at Police Station Surajpur, District Surajpur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(4), 318(2), 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 66(D) of Information Technology Act. ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.07.25 11:41:47 +0530 2 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that victims have lodged online complaints with the Indian Cyber Cell regarding cyber fraud incidents. During the investigation, it was found that the main accused, Anand Kumar Sahu, had provided his Bank of Maharashtra account (Account No. 60477170109) to the accused Saurabh Sahu, which was linked to online cyber fraud complaints. The bank statement revealed transactions related to online cyber fraud. An offense was registered against Anand Kumar Sahu under Crime No. 150/2025, Sections 420, 413, 120B of IPC and 317(4), 318(2), and 61(2) of BNS, the case is under investigation. During interrogation, Anand Kumar Sahu revealed that he, along with Saurabh Sahu and Aman Sahu, had obtained bank accounts from acquaintances by promising them money and sold these accounts to cyber fraudsters for Rs.6,000/- to Rs.12,000/- per account, the allegation against the applicants that they facilitated the alleged cyber fraud by providing bank accounts to the main accused for monetary gain, subsequently, present applicants were also arrested. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submit that there is no element of cheating or forgery as alleged. Instead, the applicants themselves are victims, as their bank accounts were used without their knowledge, and transactions were made by the main accused. The villagers had submitted a written complaint to the SP, Sarangarh Bhilaigarh, a copy of which is attached as Annexure A/2. He also submits that the misuse of 3 Sections 420, 413, and 120B of the IPC, Sections 317(4), 318(2), and 61(2) of the BNS, and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act has reached an extent where it undermines the purpose of these provisions. What was intended for genuine cases has become a tool for personal vendettas, proving detrimental to society. Despite good intentions behind these laws and recent amendments, their implementation has yielded undesirable results. There's a growing trend among people, often encouraged by their close ones, to falsely implicate innocent individuals like the applicants. This case exemplifies such misuse, where allegations are merely suggestive without establishing a criminal offense, highlighting the improper use of police machinery and the criminal justice system. The applicants are in jail since 01.04.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. She further submits that the applicants facilitated the cyber fraud by providing bank accounts to the main accused for monetary gain, so far as other co- accused persons are concerned, the bail application of co-accused persons, namely, Anand Kumar Sahu, Surya Babu, Saurabh Sahu and Suraj Diwan have already been rejected by this Court vide orders dated 10.07.2025, 02.072025 and 02.07.2025 in MCRC Nos. 4936 of 2025, 3403 of 2025 and 3878 of 2025, therefore, present applicants are not entitled for grant of bail. 4 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of the offence, material available in the case dairy, it prima facie appears that the applicants are involved in a serious cybercrime offence, the investigation revealed that the bank accounts of the accused / applicants demonstrate suspicious transactional activity, suggestive of their involvement in the organized cybercrime, the investigation further revealed that the applicants facilitated the cyber fraud by providing bank accounts to the main accused for monetary gain and entered into a conspiracy to illicitly obtain financial benefits by misappropriating their bank accounts for the purpose of perpetrating online fraud, as regards the other co- accused persons, the bail applications of co-accused persons, namely, Anand Kumar Sahu, Surya Babu, Saurabh Sahu and Suraj Diwan have already been rejected by this Court vide orders dated 10.07.2025, 02.072025 and 02.07.2025 in MCRC Nos. 4936 of 2025, 3403 of 2025 and 3878 of 2025 and the case of the present applicants is identical to that of the aforementioned co-accused persons, as such, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicants on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicants-Satish Ajay and Anjali Ajay involved in Crime No. 150/2025, registered at Police Station Surajpur, District Surajpur (CG) for the offence punishable 5 under Sections 317(4), 318(2), 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 66(D) of Information Technology Act, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and concluded 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. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek