1 2025:CGHC:53897 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8787 of 2025 Mohmmad Rafiq S/o Sheikh Rehman Aged About 32 Years R/o Near Kgn Mosque, Raipur Naka, Durg, Tehsil And District Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Mohan Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Virendra Kashyap, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 04.11.2025 1. This is the third bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 221/2025 registered at Police Station Mohan Nagar, District 2 Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 317(2), 317(4), 318(4), 61(2)(a) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a cyber fraud was detected through the Samanvay Portal of the Ministry of Home Affairs, wherein a Punjab National Bank account in the name of the applicant, Mohammed Rafiq, was found used for receiving Rs.25,000/- each from two victims on 15.08.2024. During investigation, the applicant admitted that he had allowed his associate, Sanu Khan, to use his passbook and ATM card for the said transactions in return for Rs.15,000/-. It is alleged that both accused conspired to gain unlawful monetary benefits through online fraud, for which offences under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318(4), and 61(2)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 were registered against them. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the earlier two bail applications of the applicant was rejected by this Court on merits vide orders dated 14.07.2025 and 08.10.2025 in MCRC No.5450 of 2025 and MCRC No.7927 of 2025, respectively, therefore this second bail application is filed on the ground that the co-accused, Sanu Khan, who was also involved in the present case and who misused the account of the present applicant has been arrested though in another criminal case, so far as present applicant is concerned, he is in jail since 25.05.2025 and till date no charges have been framed, charge-sheet has already been filed in the 3 present case, hence, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 4. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant is alleged to have permitted his associate, Sanu Khan, to use his bank account, passbook, and ATM card to receive fraudulent online transactions amounting to Rs.50,000/- from two victims, in return for Rs.15,000/-, thereby knowingly participating in a cyber fraud for unlawful gain, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. From perusal of the records, it appears that the earlier two bail applications of the accused was rejected by this Court vide orders dated 14.07.2025 and 08.10.2025 in MCRC No.5450 of 2025 and MCRC No.7927 of 2025, respectively, on the ground that the applicant had knowingly allowed his Punjab National Bank account to be used for cyber fraud and had received Rs.5,000/- in return. The account was used to fraudulently obtained Rs.25,000/- each from two victims. So far as the status of trial is concerned, it is stated that till date charges have not been famed, but from perusal of the order-sheet of the trial Court annexed by the counsel for the applicant goes to show that the co-accused was absconding, hence the trial could not proceeded, further there 4 appears to be no good ground to entertain the present bail application of the applicant. As such, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant-Mohmmad Rafiq, involved in Crime No. 221/2025 registered at Police Station Mohan Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 317(2), 317(4), 318(4), 61(2)(a) of BNS, is rejected at this stage. 8. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil