1 2025:CGHC:52339 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8483 of 2025 • Biru Lahre S/o Late Naindas Aged About 27 Years R/o Ganjipara Khairagarh, Police Station And Tahsil Khairagarh, District : Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Khairagarh, District : Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Jitendra Gupta, Advocate For Respondent : Ms. Supriya Upasne, Government Advocate Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27.10.2025 1. This is Second 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. 70/2025 registered at Police Station – Khairagarh, District – Khairagarh-Chuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318(4) and 61(2)(a) of BNS and Section 66-D of Information of Technology Act. 2. The first bail application filed by the applicant was rejected on VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.10.29 15:23:37 +0530 2 merits in MCRC No.4373 of 2025 alongwith other connected matters vide common order dated 02.07.2025. 3. As per prosecution story in brief is that upon monitoring mule accounts through the co-ordination portal operated by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, it was found that 19 bank account holders from various branches, namely Bank of Maharashtra, Punjab National Bank, Kenra bank, HDFC Bank, IDBI Bank, State Bank of India and State Bank of India, Saloni Branch received a total of Rs. 2,88,33,185/- from cyber fraud. The aforesaid 19 bank account holders hatched a conspiracy and got enriched illegally for which a complaint was lodged online. On the basis of the seizure conducted, the applicants were taken into custody and their memorandum statement was recorded wherein he admitted to having received commission, thereby all the accused persons have committed aforesaid alleged crime and thereafter, they have been arrested by the police concerned. Hence, this bail application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and as per the status of the trial, seizure witnesses have been turned hostile. He further submits that the charges leveled against the applicant just in order to harass him, he had no such bank accounts which can be operated as mule account nor his identity proof has been used with his consent to open any account in any of the bank branches to earn any kind of profit. 3 He also submits that applicant is in jail since 03.03.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel, opposes the bail application and submits that there is no previous antecedent against the applicant and present applicant was involved in the said offence as a result present case is of the nature of cyber fraud, by which the complainants suffered of huge amount. Thus, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of dispute and material available in the case diary, it transpires that the present case is of the nature of cyber fraud and applicant was involved in the said crime and first bail application filed by the applicant was rejected on merits in MCRC No.4373 of 2025 along with other connected matters vide common order dated 02.07.2025, further there appears to be no new ground, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, this bail application of applicant – Biru Lahre, involved in Crime No.70/2025 registered at Police Station – Khairagarh, District – Khairagarh-Chuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318(4) 4 and 61(2)(a) of BNS and Section 66-D of Information of Technology Act is rejected at this stage. 9. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 10. 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 vaishali