1 2025:CGHC:48790 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6906 of 2025 Jitendra Yadav S/o Sudama Yadav Aged About 39 Years Caste- Ahir, R/o Village Sapkara (Barpara), P.S And Tehsil And District Surajpur (C.G.) ...Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Vishrampur, District Surajpur (C.G.) … Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Bharat Gulabani, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 23.09.2025 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. 134/2025 registered at Police Station : Vishrampur District - Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 317(4), 318(4), 61(2) (a) of the BNS and Section 66(D) of the I.T. Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that, the case shows that the mule VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.09.24 12:38:32 +0530 2 account number of branch Vishrampur was received from the office of Additional Superintendent of Police for investigation. In the course of investigation, information regarding the said account was extracted from the joint cybercrime coordination team management information system operated by the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre. There were 04 acknowledgement. numbers against the said account on the portal, namely, 1. 22701250003503 Fraud amount Rs. 7,990/- District Jaipur City East Rajasthan, 2. 31601250009814 Fraud amount Rs. 32,000/- District Bangalore Karnataka, 31601250012049 Fraud amount Rs. 28,000/- District Kodagu Karnataka, 4. 31601250013450 Fraud amount Rs. 32,000/-District Bangalore City Karnataka. The bank statement was also obtained and it was found that the said account holder was involved in cyber fraud and had received fraudulent money in his account several times. Hence, the account holder was found to have conspired with other 2 co-accused persons for which offences under sections 317(4), 318(2), 61(2) Offence registered under BNS. 3. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any act constituting an offence under Sections 317(4), 318(4), 61(2)(a) of the BNS Act and Section 66(D) of the IT Act, as the allegations are baseless and unsupported by any cogent evidence. He has been implicated solely because fraudulent money was credited into his account, though there is no direct evidence of his involvement, and the misuse of his account was caused by his son, Divesh Kumar Yadav, for wrongful gain without the applicant’s knowledge or consent. The essential ingredients of criminal conspiracy and fraudulent intent are absent against him. The applicant undertakes to cooperate fully 3 with the investigation and trial proceedings. The case is primarily documentary in nature, involving bank records, portal acknowledgments, and cyber data, all of which have been collected, making custodial interrogation unnecessary. The alleged offences are triable by a Magistrate and not punishable with death or life imprisonment. The applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, with movable and immovable properties there, and is ready to furnish adequate surety and abide by all conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court while granting bail. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel State opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the present applicant has three criminal antecedents therefore he is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the fact that the applicant’s bank account was misused by his son without the applicant’s knowledge or consent, further taking into account that the applicant has been in custody since 01.06.2025 and the charge sheet has already been filed, this Court finds that the case of the applicant is distinguishable from that of his son and further considering that the trial is likely to take some time to conclude, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. 7. Let applicant, Jitendra Yadav, involved in Crime No.134/2025 4 registered at Police Station : Vishrampur District - Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 317(4), 318(4), 61(2)(a) of the BNS and Section 66(D) of the I.T. Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties in the like amount 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, 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 concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav