1 2025:CGHC:58561 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9855 of 2025 1 - Mahesh Kumar Chakradhari S/o Jagdish Prasad Chakradhari, Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Gangouti, Out Post Basdei, Police Station And District Surajpur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House O昀케cer, Police Of Police Station Surajpur, District Surajpur (C.G.) ----Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anil Gulati, Advocate For-Non-applicant : Mr. Ajit Singh, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 03.12.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. in connection with Crime No. 379/2025, registered at Police Station Surajpur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh for the o昀昀ences punishable under Sections 317(4), 318(2), 61(2)(A) of BNS and Section 66(D) of Information Technology Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, joint Cyber Crime Coordination Team Management Information System in a portal, it Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.12.16 18:55:22 +0530 2 was found that there are di昀昀erent-di昀昀erent Branches of Bank, in which via forged mobile numbers, the amount was deposited and it was found that in the joint account which was opened by Dev Narayan Chakradhari and Mahesh Kumar Chakradhari i.e. present applicant in the name of society known as D.N. Chakradhari Education Development Education at Surajpur and sum of Rs.72,76,413/- was received in the said account and the account was opened at IDFC Bank Branch at Surajpur, in which the amount of Cyber Fraud was deposited and on being found that the amount was transferred in the account of D.N. Chakradhari Education Development Education was deposited is the amount of cyber fraud, subsequently the matter being investigated by the police and it was found that in the D.N. Chakradhari sum of Rs. Education Development Education, 72,76,413/- was deposited and the applicant has been a arrested for the commission of alleged o昀昀ences. 3. Learned Counsel for the convicts/applicant have argued that the main accused of present crime is Dev Narayan Chakradhari, who is cousin brother of applicant and during the course of investigation, it was found that the account was opened in the name of D.N. Chakradhari Education Development Education by the main accused Dev Narayan Chakradhari and in a trust, which was opened by Dev Narayan Chakradhari, the applicant is not holding any post in the said trust but in the joint account, which 3 was opened in IDFC Bank. The applicant is not aware that Dev Narayan obtained his signature in the Bank Form stating that the account has to be opened in the name of firm for social work and under bonafide intention, the applicant signed the signature, so there is no involvement of applicant. Along with the charge sheet, the prosecution filed the paper to demonstrate that the account No. 10222119363 was involved in 21 complaints i.e. online financial fraud at various parts of the country. The applicant has been fooled by the co-accused Dev Narayan Chakradhari. The applicant is languishing in jail since 31-07-2025 and the trial is likely to take much time for its final conclusion, so looking to the detention period of applicant, the Court may kind enough to consider the case of applicant for grant of regular bail. 4. An objection has been filed on behalf of the State/respondent. It was argued by the State Counsel that considering the offence committed by the applicant, they do not deserve to be released on bail. The findings arrived at by the learned trial Court is just and proper. 5. I have learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the magnitude of the financial fraud involved, the applicant’s admitted status as a joint account holder in the account through which the 4 alleged cyber-fraud amount of 72,76,413/- was transacted, and ₹ the prima facie material collected during investigation indicating his complicity, at this stage, this Court finds it appropriate to reject the instant application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail. 7. O昀케ce is directed to provide a certi昀椀ed copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti