1 2025:CGHC:61532 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9448 of 2025 1 - Ravishankar Mandavi S/o Shri Shishupal Mandavi Aged About 28 Years R/o Petoli, Thana- Kanker, Distt.- North Bastar Kanker C.G. 2 - Shatrughan Mandavi S/o Late Shri Vasuram Mandavi Aged About 24 Years R/o Badepara Kirgoli, Thana- Kanker, Distt.- North Bastar Kanker C.G. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Kanker, Distt.- North Bastar Kanker C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Deputy A.G. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 17/12/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in 2 connection with Crime No. 382/2025 registered at Police Station Kanker, Distt.- North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 318(4), 3(5) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that complainant Maniram Bhoi, a Constable posted in the Cyber Cell, Kanker, lodged a complaint stating that on 25.10.2025 information was received from the Home Department’s Samanvay Portal regarding suspicious money transfers through mule accounts. Upon enquiry, the police found that Rs.16,05,011/- had been transferred into the account of applicant Shatrughan Mandavi and Rs.14,76,201/- into the account of applicant Ravishankar Mandavi. During interrogation, the applicants disclosed that their bank accounts were opened and handed over to one Dheeraj Kumar of Ranchi on his assurance of paying Rs.3,000/- per month. Consequently, the police seized the bank account statements and KYC documents and arrested the applicants for their alleged involvement in the offence. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits the applicants, who are poor and employed as security guards in the private sector in Raipur, submit that they met the main accused, Dheeraj Kumar and Gorelal, who promised them payment only after the bank accounts were opened. He further submits that the applicants did not open any bank accounts themselves and only provided their ID and residential documents to the co-accused, who then opened and operated the accounts in the applicants’ names. He also submits 3 that the applicants assert that they did not make any transactions from the accounts and were unaware of their use until the police apprehended them. They contend that their arrest is based solely on suspicion, without any verification that they actually committed fraud or received money through deceit. The applicants are in jail since 26.10.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that in compliance of the Court’s order dated 21.11.2025, the concerned Investigating Officer has filed his personal affidavit in the matter disclosing that the present accused applicants, Ravishankar Mandavi and Shatrughan Ram Mandavi, were involved in cyber fraud by opening multiple bank accounts used as mule accounts to receive illegally obtained money. Ravishankar Mandavi, a security guard from Raipur, stated in his memorandum that he provided his Aadhaar card and other documents to persons from Ranchi Dheeraj Singh, Gorelal, and Ayush Kumar Rai who assured him a monthly payment of Rs.3,000 in exchange for opening and maintaining the accounts in his name. Consequently, he opened accounts in UCO Bank, HDFC Bank, Central Bank of India, AU Small Finance Bank, Bank of India, Axis Bank, Union Bank, Punjab National Bank, and Bank of Maharashtra, keeping passbooks, ATM cards, and cheque books with himself. Shatrughan Ram Mandavi, a mason from Village Kirgoli, similarly 4 stated that on the assurance of a monthly payment of Rs.3,000 from persons from Ranchi, he opened accounts in UCO Bank, Punjab National Bank, Bank of Maharashtra, Indian Bank, and Bank of Baroda and handed over the related documents, SIM cards, and bank instruments to them. The investigation revealed that the accounts of both applicants were used to receive large sums of money from cyber fraud, amounting to Rs.43,83,640/- in Ravishankar’s accounts and Rs.16,06,011/- in Shatrughan’s accounts, and prima facie, offences under the BNS, 2023 were committed. The IO further submitted that granting bail to the applicants could lead to absconding, interference with the investigation, and repetition of similar cyber crimes. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court finds that the prosecution case, supported by the affidavit of the Investigating Officer, prima facie establishes the involvement of the applicants, Ravishankar Mandavi and Shatrughan Ram Mandavi, in a serious cyber fraud, the investigation reveals that the applicants opened multiple bank accounts in their names and handed over the accounts, SIM cards, and banking instruments to co-accused persons from Ranchi on the assurance of receiving monthly payments, these accounts were subsequently used to receive large sums of money Rs.43,83,640/- in Ravishankar’s accounts and Rs.16,06,011/- in Shatrughan’s accounts obtained through 5 fraudulent online transactions. The seizure of account statements, KYC documents, and the statements of the applicants indicate their prima facie complicity in the offence under the BNS, 2023, in light of the gravity of the allegations, the risk of absconding, and the possibility of interference with the investigation or commission of similar cyber crimes, this Court is of the view that the applicants are not entitled to bail at this stage. 7. Accordingly, the bail applications of applicants - Ravishankar Mandavi and Shatrughan Mandavi, involved in Crime No. 382/2025 registered at Police Station Kanker, Distt.- North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 318(4), 3(5) of BNS, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and concluded the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil