1 2025:CGHC:60067 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8826 of 2025 Sanjay Yadav S/o Shri Ravishankar Yadav Aged About 24 Years R/o - Nandi Chowk, Near Yadav Atta Chakki, Tikrapara, Tehsil And District - Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station - Cyber Cell Headquarter Raipur, District – Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Virendra Kashyap, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 10.12.2025 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. 229/2025 registered at Police Station – Cyber Cell Headquarter 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 Cyber Police of Raipur registered a cybercrime case based on a complaint received via the "Samanvay" portal, operated by the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre. The complaint involved fraudulent transactions linked to 45 bank accounts in Ratnakar bank limited, Raipur (IFSC: RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 RATN0000389), Raipur branch. These accounts, which began operating for received illegal funds suspected to be proceeds of cyber fraud. The applicant was arrested by Police Station-Cyber police Raipur, District:-Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case, and there is no evidence on record to prove that the applicant is involved in the online fraud. It is further submitted that the allegations are based entirely on the false allegations, and no directed evidence connects the applicant to the alleged crime. It is further submitted that there is no any previous criminal antecedents of the applicant, and the applicant is in jail since 27.03.2025, and the trial is likely to take quite long time, hence, 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 applicant knowingly opened RBL Bank account No. 309024253107 using his own credentials and thereafter intentionally surrendered the entire bank account kit comprising ATM card, passbook, registered SIM, and internet banking credentials to co-accused Mohammed Irfan in exchange for illegal monetary consideration of Rs. 5,000, fully aware that the same would be utilized for unlawful online money movement. The said account thereafter witnessed suspicious financial transactions amounting to Rs. 16,38,291 within an abnormally short period, clearly indicating its use as a mule account exclusively for receiving 3 funds defrauded from multiple victims. The involvement of the applicant is further substantiated by three independent cyber fraud complaints registered on the official National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal/1930 directly linked to this account. 5. Learned State counsel further submits that despite being served statutory notices under Sections 35(3) and 94 of the B.N.S.S., the applicant failed to furnish any document relating to the bank account, its sale, the money received, or the registered mobile number, thereby demonstrating deliberate non-cooperation and conscious suppression of material evidence. His evasive conduct, coupled with the ongoing investigation into multiple absconding co- accused including the main operators and handlers of the fraudulent network, creates a high risk of tampering with evidence, influencing material witnesses, and obstructing further investigation if he were to be released on bail. So far as the co-accused persons are concerned, their bail applications have already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 17.09.2025 passed in MCRC Nos. 6376/2025, 6895/2025 and 6576/2025, vide order dated 31.07.2025 passed in MCRC No.5999/2025 and vide order dated 04.07.2025 passed in MCRC No.5203/2025. As such, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. From the perusal of the records as well as the bail rejection order of the trial Court concerned, and considering the overall incriminating 4 facts and circumstances emerging from the case diary, it is evident that the material collected during the investigation prima facie establishes the applicant’s conscious, deliberate, and active involvement in the organized cyber-fraud syndicate. The applicant intentionally opened RBL Bank account No. 309024253107 using his valid KYC documents, fully aware that such accounts constitute the backbone of cyber-fraud syndicates for routing, layering, and concealing illicit funds. He voluntarily sold this account for a monetary reward to co-accused Mohammed Irfan, who is known in the locality for engaging in suspicious financial activities, thereby providing organized cyber offenders with a legitimate banking identity shielded behind the applicant’s credentials. The account subsequently received Rs.16,38,291/- through suspicious transactions arising from cyber-crime, and at least three victims have directly linked their losses to this account through formal complaints on the Cyber Crime Portal/1930. The applicant’s consistent refusal to produce the bank kit, the proceeds of the sale, or any document relating to the operation of the account, despite issuance of statutory notices, further demonstrates his deliberate intention to obstruct the investigation and protect the perpetrators. His conduct indicates clear mens rea, active participation, and conscious facilitation of the offence. 8. So far as the co-accused persons are concerned, their bail applications have already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 17.09.2025 passed in MCRC Nos. 6376/2025, 6895/2025 and 6576/2025, vide order dated 31.07.2025 passed in MCRC 5 No.5999/2025 and vide order dated 04.07.2025 passed in MCRC No.5203/2025. 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 Yadav, involved in Crime No. 229/2025 registered at Police Station – Cyber Cell Headquarter 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