1 2025:CGHC:53952 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7755 of 2025 1. Abdulaziz Bena Rabiu S/o Rabiu Aged About 28 Years R/o Birnin Kebbi, State Abuja, Country Nigeria 2. Aminu Garba S/o Garba Haruna Aged About 23 Years R/o Birnin Kebbi, State Abuja, Country Nigeria. Current Address- Boys Hostel, Kalinga University Hostel, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The PS Gudhiyari, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. N. Naha Roy, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Swajeet Ubeja, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 04.11.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 17/2025, registered at Police Station Gudhiyari, District – Raipur (C.G) for the o;ence punishable under Section 318(4), 111 and Section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The applicants are citizens of Nigeria and are in India for the purpose of pursuing their studies. They are both enrolled in the Bachelor of ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.11.07 14:48:52 +0530 2 Pharmacy (B. Pharmacy) course at Kalinga University, Raipur (C.G.). The duration of the course is four years, commencing from the year 2023. As per the case of the prosecution, during the period from 17.03.2024 to 27.09.2024, the complainant, namely Umakant Verma, was allegedly induced by unknown persons through WhatsApp messages sent from mobile number 9690047185 to make investments amounting to a total of Rs. 50,00,000/-, with the assurance of earning a 30% proBt in return for performing free tasks such as liking products on the Amazon App and sharing screenshots to receive cash-backs. The registration of the FIR led to a detailed investigation by the police, followed by the Bling of the charge sheet under Sections 318(4), 111, and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the prosecution has prepared a concocted case, which is not substantiated by any credible or cogent evidence. He submits that the names of the applicants do not Bnd any mention in the FIR, nor does the record of investigation indicate that the applicants ever approached the complainant, either through phone calls or WhatsApp messages, or that they shared any scheme or demanded money. In the absence of any material evidence against the applicants, they deserve to be set at liberty by this Hon’ble Court. The complainant has not carried out any Bnancial transactions in the bank accounts belonging to the applicants herein. In other words, since no amount has been transferred by the complainant to the bank accounts of the applicants, there is no loss caused to the complainant at their instance. Therefore, the applicants, who have no involvement in the alleged o;ence, may kindly be granted bail at this juncture. He further submits that the applicants Bnd it pertinent to point out that the complaint 3 attached with the charge sheet, which led to the registration of FIR dated 20.01.2025, makes no mention of any bank accounts belonging to or related to the applicants. Furthermore, the case diary statements recorded on 21.01.2025 also do not contain any such reference. It was only subsequently, on 23.01.2025, that a supplementary case diary statement was recorded wherein the bank accounts related to the applicants were mentioned for the Brst time. However, these bank accounts are not referred to in the WhatsApp chats between the complainant and the accused persons annexed to the charge sheet. This raises serious doubts as to how the bank accounts of the applicants, which show no transactions connected with the alleged o;ence, could be made the subject matter of the crime. He also submits that the police had forwarded details of the bank accounts to the concerned banks much before such accounts came to light for the Brst time in the supplementary case diary statement dated 23.01.2025. In other words, the police authorities sought details of all the alleged bank accounts, including those of the applicants, immediately after the registration of the FIR on 20.01.2025, whereas the bank accounts related to the applicants were Brst referred to only on 23.01.2025. This inconsistency creates serious doubt about the veracity and fairness of the investigation. Therefore, the applicants may kindly be granted bail by this Hon’ble Court. He submits that the applicants are bona Bde students residing in India on valid student visas and are nationals of Nigeria. There is no evidence whatsoever indicating their involvement in the alleged o;ence, nor have they received any money in their bank accounts. The prosecution’s case, as discussed above, lacks credibility. Hence, in the interest of their academic future, the applicants may be graciously granted bail by this Hon’ble Court. He further submits that the present applicants have no 4 criminal antecedents and they are in jail since 24.01.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case charge-sheet has been Bled before the competent Court. He submits that the applicants/accused persons, along with other co- accused, are alleged to have acted as part of an organized syndicate, sharing a common intention, and deceitfully induced the complainant to transfer a total sum of Rs. 50,00,000/- (Fifty Lakh Rupees) online into various bank accounts by o;ering the lure of proBt through “free tasks” and “prepaid tasks.” He also submits that the in the present case, the applicant/accused Abdulaziz Bena Rabiu is the holder of Canara Bank Account No. 112000367625, and the applicant/accused Aminu Garba is the holder of Canara Bank Account No. 112000539840, into which the alleged fraudulent amounts were also deposited. Therefore, the present applicants are not entitled for grant of regular bail in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and taking into account that the applicants/accused persons, along with other co- accused, are alleged to have acted as part of an organized syndicate sharing a common intention, and deceitfully induced the complainant to transfer a total sum of Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakh only) online into various bank accounts by o;ering the lure of proBt through “free tasks” and “prepaid tasks,”. It is transpired in present case, that the applicant/accused Abdulaziz Bena Rabiu is the holder of Canara Bank Account No. 112000367625, and the applicant/accused Aminu Garba is the holder of Canara Bank Account No. 112000539840, into which 5 portions of the alleged fraudulent amount were deposited. Considering the existence of a common objective and clear indications of organized criminal activity, the applicants/accused are, prima facie, found to be liable for each act constituting the o;ence. The alleged o;ences appear to be of a serious nature. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that this is not a Bt case for granting regular bail to the applicants. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants – Abdulaziz Bena Rabiu and Aminu Garba, involved in Crime No. 17/2025, registered at Police Station Gudhiyari, District – Raipur (C.G) for the o;ence punishable under Section 318(4), 111 and Section 3(5) 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. OIce is directed to send a certiBed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek