1 2025:CGHC:20647 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1783 of 2025 Order reserved on 09.04.2025 Order delivered on 06.05.2025 Jayprakash Singh S/o Late Gurucharan Singh Aged About 36 Years R/o Subhash Ward, Village- Bela, P.S Bhandara, District- Bhandara, Maharashtra ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through, Station House Officer Dindayal Upadhyay Nagar Raipur, District- Raipur, (C.G.) ...Respondent (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. B.P. Singh with Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar and Mr. Shikhar Bakhatiyar, Advocates For Non-Applicant/ State : Mr. Kishan Lal Sahu, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas CAV Order 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested on 07.12.2023 in connection with Crime No. SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Digitally signed by SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Date: 2025.05.06 17:15:40 +0530 2 460/2023 registered at Police Station- Dindayal Upadhyay Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420,201,120-B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. First bail application of the applicant was disposed of granting liberty to file afresh bail application after submission of additional charge sheet as per law in MCRC No. 1425 of 2024 on 22.07.2024. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on the written complaint of Mukesh Soni, FIR was registered against the applicant on 10.10.2023 alleging in it that the applicant along with other co-accused have allured them to invest/deposit money in Quick Trade Cripto Trading Company and assured them that after investing the money in the said company they will receive 15% higher rate of returns. It is also alleged that on the assurance of the applicant, the complainant invested about Rs 8,36,440/- in the said company, however, the amount was not returned to them and when the complainant tried to contact the applicant, mobile phone of applicant and co-accused were switched off. Thereafter, this fact came to his knowledge that the applicant induced and cheated him. Based on the report, aforementioned crime was registered and during the investigation, applicant was arrested on 07.12.2023. 3. During pendency of the first bail application, State has constituted Special Investigation Team (SIT) on 28.05.2024, statements of complainants were recorded under Section 161 CrPC wherein it was found that around 200 complainants were cheated by the applicant and co-accused. Subsequently, additional charge sheet under Section 173(8) CrPC was filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rajnandgaon. 3 During investigation, one of the investors/complainants has stated that he has invested Rs. 87,000/- through Phone pay in the Cripto currency but no refund of amount has been received by him thus he has been cheated by the applicant. It is also case of the prosecution that the web site and app developer has stated that present applicant and Subelal Sahu have given him Rs. 75,000/- for developing the app. The other investors have also stated that as to how the applicant and other co-accused have cheated them and took out their hard earned huge amount on the allurement for providing higher return of amount on the invested money. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in the case. He would further submit that the applicant has not played active role directly or indirectly in the alleged crime. He would further submit that the prosecution has cited total 189 witnesses in their support and till date only one witness was examined before the Court and trial will take some time for its conclusion. He would further submit that the prosecution has not seized any incriminating article from the applicant and amount was not transferred in the account of the applicant. He would further submit that main accused Subhelal @ Sushil Sahu and co-accused Lokesh Sahu were granted bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court though Shubhelal was actively involved in the alleged crime. He would further submit that the applicant is in jail since 07.12.2023, the charge sheet has already been filed and no custodial interrogation is required in this case, offence is tribal by Judicial Magistrate First Class. therefore, he prays for enlarging the applicant on regular bail. 4 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and would submit that during investigation applicant was found to be involved in the commission of crime and he was arrested. He would further submit that from the document available with the case diary, prima-facie, involvement of the applicant is reflected. He would further submit that the offence committed by the applicant is heinous, against the society and would pray for dismissal of the bail application. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. From perusal of case diary, it is quite vivid that large number of innocent investors have already invested their hard-earned money in the company on the allurement given by the applicant and co-accused where they assured the investors to give higher return of money but neither the amount invested in the company nor profit as assured was returned to the complainant/investors. Further considering the fact that strong evidence against the applicant that the substantial gains worth of rupees 3,31,86,036/-, which were acquired through the fraudulent scheme of crypto currency by co-accused Subhelal, which cannot be overlooked and thus, taking into account the allegations levelled against the applicant that he has committed breach of trust and disregarded the interest of the poor villagers, who have invested their money for earning 15% higher return on the invested money but they did not return the same to the invested, cheated and misappropriated huge amount of Rs. 3,31,86,036/-as reflected from the additional charge sheet submitted on 27.06.2024 by the 5 prosecution. From perusal of the diary, it is also quite vivid, that around 168 investors have invested their hard earned huge amount in the company of the applicant which has siphon-offed by the applicant is required to be traced out by the prosecution, as such custodial interrogation of the applicant is required in this case, therefore, at this stage the bail application of the applicant is liable to be dismissed and it is dismissed. Accordingly, the second bail application is dismissed. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Santosh