1 2025:CGHC:55826 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8228 of 2025 Sanjay Jaswani S/o Nandiram Jaswani Aged About 46 Years R/o Solas Heights Block- M.B. Floor 104, Amlidih Police Station, New Rajendra Nagar District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station, Cyber Range Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Fouzia Mirza, Senior Advocate, assisted by Ms. Ali Afzaal Mirza, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 17.11.2025 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant arrested in connection with Crime No. 129/2025 registered at Police Station – Cyber Range, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that an information was received RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 at police station Civil Lines Raipur, whereby on 23.03.2025 upon considering the information received from Cyber Range Police Station Raipur for actions against the mule account holders through the coordination portal operated by Home Ministry, Government of India, prima facie crime U/s 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 & 3(5) of B.N.S. 2023 was found to have been committed, therefore the crime was registered and was taken up for investigation. That, the information reflects in the Coordination Portal of the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Center which is operated by the Home Ministry, Government of India, which is a comprehensive guide for sharing information as to Cyber Crime for the purpose of investigation by the Police, upon receiving such information of the mule account which is being used for disbursing, utilizing and enriching the amount obtained from the Cyber Fraud, therefore such information related to Cyber Fraud was collected from the Coordination Portal, in which a total of 128 Bank Accounts of the Bank Of Maharashtra Raipur Branch were found to have deposits of Rs. 64,10,855/- till 11.01.2025, which had been obtained by way of Cyber Fraud. Upon receiving the said information and having reason to believe that the amount is being used, concealed or disposed for the purpose of Cyber Fraud with respect to the aforesaid bank accounts, the offence was registered and taken up for investigation. Hence, this application. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been 3 submitted in this case. It is further submitted that no incriminating material or proceeds of crime have been recovered from the applicant. The entire case is based on statements and assumptions without any direct material evidence against the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 11.04.2025, and the conclusion of the trial shall take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that from the perusal of the case-diary it transpires that the material collected during investigation clearly reveals a deep-rooted, structured and profit-oriented criminal conspiracy in which the present applicant has played an indispensable and conscious role in facilitating the commission of large-scale cyber frauds affecting numerous innocent citizens across the country. 5. It is further submitted by learned State counsel that the Cyber Crime Reporting Portal of the Ministry of Home Affairs flagged 128 mule accounts opened in the Bank of Maharashtra, Raipur, which were being systematically used by organized cyber criminals for receiving proceeds of fraudulent transactions. Among these, the applicant's bank account No. 60482900775, registered with mobile No. 9238377679, reflected suspicious deposits amounting to Rs.10,33,741/- within a short period, unmistakably establishing its misuse for laundering proceeds of cyber cheating. The complainant’s amount of Rs.32,688/- was traced directly into this account, thereby linking the applicant’s account to a specific instance of cyber fraud. Furthermore, the applicant, in his 4 memorandum, admitted that he knowingly sold the said bank account to co-accused Nikhil Ahuja for monetary gain, thereby facilitating its onward circulation within a criminal chain engaged in procurement, sale, and utilisation of mule accounts for cyber cheating. Subsequent disclosures by co-accused Nikhil Ahuja and Sanjay Jaswani further reveal that the applicant's account was eventually supplied to cyber criminals Jitesh Badlani and Aman Bal, in exchange for substantial amounts of money, thereby forming an essential link in the illegal banking channel through which cyber fraud proceeds were routed. 6. Learned State counsel also submits that the applicant not only transferred control of his bank account unlawfully but also failed to produce any documents or explanation regarding the substantial suspicious transactions, despite issuance of notices under Sections 35(3) and 94 BNSS, showing absolute non-cooperation and deliberate withholding of material facts. The conduct of the applicant demonstrates a conscious and willful involvement in a multi-layered cyber-fraud syndicate, which has far-reaching implications on national financial security and public trust in digital banking systems. The gravity of the offence, the magnitude of the fraudulent transactions, the existence of a wider conspiracy, the applicant’s role as a key facilitator by providing and transferring mule accounts, the likelihood of tampering with evidence, the possibility of influencing witnesses, and the clear apprehension of further similar offences if released, all create compelling grounds for denial of bail. So far as the other co-accused persons are concerned, there bail 5 application have already been rejected by this Court vide orders dated 12.09.2025 and 31.10.2025 passed in MCRC Nos. 7344/2025 and 8661/2025, respectively. As such, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. From the perusal of the records as well as the bail rejection order of the trial Court concerned, and considering the overall incriminating facts and circumstances emerging from the case diary, it is evident that the applicant actively participated in the cyber-fraud racket by knowingly selling his bank account, permitting its misuse as a mule account, enabling the receipt and layering of fraudulent funds, and acting as a crucial intermediary in the organised network of cyber criminals. The applicant’s account bears clear traces of large-scale suspicious transactions amounting to Rs.10,33,741/-, including specific fraudulent amounts received from victims, and his deliberate failure to produce documents or cooperate with investigators further strengthens the inference of culpability. The chain of disclosures from co-accused persons clearly establishes the applicant’s role in the procurement and circulation of mule accounts in exchange for illicit monetary benefits.. So far as the other co-accused persons are concerned, there bail application have already been rejected by this Court vide orders dated 12.09.2025 and 31.10.2025 passed in MCRC Nos. 7344/2025 and 8661/2025, respectively. In view of these incriminating circumstances and the applicant’s specific role in facilitating the 6 crime. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 9. Accordingly, this first bail application of applicant – Sanjay Jaswani involved in Crime No. 129/2025 registered at Police Station – Cyber Range, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111(3) and 3(5) of the BNS, is rejected at this stage. 10. Needless to say that the learned trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed with the trial and conclude the same, expeditiously. 11. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar