1 2025:CGHC:54237 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7801 of 2025 Ranjita Singh D/o Babusharan Singh Aged About 39 Years R/o Village- Shivnandanpur, P.S. Bishrampur, District- Surajpur, (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- S.H.O. P.S. Surajpur, District – Surajpur (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pushkar Sinha, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 06.11.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 268/2025, registered at Police Station – Surajpur, District – Surajpur (C.G.) for the o;ence punishable under Sections 420, 413, 120(B) and 34 of the IPC and Section 66(D) of the IT Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that various victims had lodged their complaints of online cyber fraud on the Coordination Portal of the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (14C). During investigation of these complaints by the o=ce of Inspector General of Police, RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 SIB/CCTNS/Cyber Crime Police Headquarters, Naya Raipur, it was found that fraudulent transactions were made through certain bank accounts. In this regard, account no. 60478065547 of Maharashtra Bank, Surajpur Branch, in the name of accused Suraj Kumar Sarathi, and account no. 60486708932 of the same bank in the name of Mukesh Kumar were found linked with several acknowledgement numbers of cyber fraud complaints. On interrogation, Mukesh Kumar revealed that he had opened an account in his name and handed it over to his relative Ranjita Singh for a sum of Rs. 1,000/-. Further, it was revealed that Ranjita Singh, at the instance of her father Mukesh Kumar, had opened an account in her name and handed over the passbook and ATM to one Chintu Singh Sohail in Surajpur in return for Rs. 3000/- out of which Rs. 1500/- was given to Mukesh Kumar and Rs. 1500/- was kept by Ranjita Singh. It was thus found that the accused persons facilitated the commission of cyber fraud by providing their accounts for fraudulent use. Hence, this application. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and there is no criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been Aled in this case. The applicant is in jail since 18.06.2025 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been Aled in this case. and the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 3 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that there is no any criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant, charge-sheet has been Aled against the applicant, the applicant is in jail since 18.06.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Let applicant, Ranjita Singh, involved in Crime No. 268/2025, registered at Police Station – Surajpur, District – Surajpur (C.G.) for the o;ence punishable under Sections 420, 413, 120(B) and 34 of the IPC and Section 66(D) of the IT Act, 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 Ale an undertaking to the e;ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates Axed 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 Axed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without su=cient 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 Axed 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 Axed for (i) opening of 4 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 su=cient 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. O=ce is directed to send a certiAed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar