1 2025:CGHC:61257 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9073 of 2025 Md. Firoz Aalam S/o Alauddin Aged About 31 Years R/o Village- Madapur, Choubey Paschim Tola, P.S.- Sadar, District- Muzaffarpur (Bihar) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- S.H.O P.S- Chalgali, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pawan Shrivastava, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16.12.2025 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 21/2025 registered at Police Station – Chalgali, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj, (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) and 319(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Abhishek Jaiswal, lodged a written complaint at Police Station Chalgali alleging that the promoters/operators of the “Antofogasta App” committed online fraud and cheating with him during the period RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 from March 2024 to September 2024, thereby dishonestly inducing him to part with a total amount of Rs.4,84,200/-. It was further alleged that similar fraudulent acts were committed with other villagers, involving several lakhs of rupees. On the basis of the said report, Crime No. 21/2025 was registered at Police Station Chalgali against unknown accused persons for offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 319(2) of the B.N.S. and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that the total amount defrauded from the complainant and other villagers aggregated to Rs.20,81,827/-. As the evidence collected during investigation prima facie established the involvement of the present applicant/accused along with other co- accused persons, a charge-sheet has been filed against them. Hence this bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, as there is no material on record to show his involvement in the alleged offence of online fraud in the guise of online gaming and betting. It is further submitted that even in the memorandum statement of the main accused, the name of the present applicant does not find mention and no role has been attributed to him in the commission of the offence. He further points out that similarly situated co-accused, namely Ramlakhan Vishwakarma, was granted bail by the learned Trial Court on 04.09.2025 on the ground that the charge-sheet had already been filed, whereas the applicant’s earlier bail application was rejected by the Trial Court, and even his second bail application was again rejected on 18.09.2025, compelling the 3 applicant to approach this Hon’ble Court by way of the present bail application. It is further submitted that the applicant is about 31 years of age, has been in custody since 20.07.2025, the charge- sheet has already been filed, he has no any criminal antecedent, the offence is triable by the learned JMFC, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. Hence, considering the parity with the co-accused, the period of incarceration, and the absence of incriminating material against him, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel, on the basis of the personal afÏdavit filed by the Investigating OfÏcer pursuant to the directions of this Hon’ble Court dated 17.11.2025, vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that the present applicant was actively involved in a large-scale online cyber fraud committed through the “Antofagasta/Entofagasta App,” by alluring the complainant and other villagers with false assurances of doubling their money and earning high returns on investment during the period from March 2024 to September 2024. It is submitted that during investigation it was revealed that as many as 24 villagers were cheated and a total amount of Rs.20,81,827/- was fraudulently siphoned off, and their statements clearly implicate the present applicant, who, in connivance with other co-accused persons, used WhatsApp calls from mobile numbers 7744965289 and 7761003332 to promote the fraudulent app. The CDR and CAF of the said numbers were obtained through the cyber cell, tracing the accused to Nagpur, Maharashtra, leading to the arrest of co- 4 accused Paritosh Manna from Nagpur and the present applicant Mohammad Firoz Aalam from Bihar. The afÏdavit further discloses that the present applicant and other co-accused operated the said app as part of a criminal conspiracy, that victim Ambar Singh’s money was deposited in the bank account of the present applicant, while the amounts of other victims were traced to the accounts of co-accused persons, and that huge illegal transactions running into crores of rupees were detected in the bank accounts used by the accused, including Account No. 120030904204 of Canara Bank, Ambikapur, jointly operated by the present applicant in the name of firm “Golden Agro India,” wherein during the relevant period an amount of Rs.2,99,25,70,306/- was credited and Rs.2,66,73,355/- was debited. He further submits that charge-sheet No. 51/2025 dated 31.08.2025 has already been filed against the present applicant and co-accused Paritosh Manna and Ram Lakhan, while further investigation is pending against other absconding co- accused, for whom a supplementary charge-sheet is to be filed under Section 193(9) of the BNS. It is also pointed out that the co- accused Paritosh Manna’s bail application has already been rejected by this Hon’ble Court in MCRC No. 6788/2025 vide order dated 16.10.2025. Considering the magnitude of the offence, the well-documented role of the present applicant, the ongoing investigation, and the serious economic impact on multiple victims, the applicant does not deserve the benefit of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 5 6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the case diary, the charge-sheet as well as the personal afÏdavit filed by the Investigating OfÏcer pursuant to the directions of this Court dated 17.11.2025, this Court finds that there is prima facie material on record indicating the active involvement of the present applicant in a well-organised online cyber fraud committed through the “Antofagasta App.” The afÏdavit of the Investigating OfÏcer clearly discloses that multiple villagers were induced to invest money on the false assurance of doubling the amount, resulting in large-scale financial loss aggregating to Rs.20,81,827/-, and that the present applicant, in connivance with other co-accused persons, played a crucial role in promoting and operating the fraudulent scheme through WhatsApp calls, bank transactions and accounts used for siphoning off the defrauded amount. The investigation has further revealed huge suspicious transactions running into crores of rupees in the bank accounts linked with the accused, including the account operated by the present applicant in the name of a firm, and the said material has been substantiated by bank statements, CDRs and statements of several victims. Further the fact that though one of the co-accused, namely Ramlakhan Vishwakarma, was granted bail by the learned Trial Court after filing of the charge-sheet, the role attributed to the present applicant is distinct and more serious in nature, and another co-accused, Paritosh Manna, whose role is similar to that of the present applicant, has already been denied the benefit of bail by this Court in MCRC No. 6788/2025 vide order dated 16.10.2025. Merely on the ground of parity, the applicant cannot claim bail when 6 the material on record, as reflected in the Investigating OfÏcer’s afÏdavit, points towards his active participation in the offence and when further investigation against other absconding accused is still in progress. Considering the gravity and magnitude of the offence, the organised manner in which the cyber fraud was committed, the involvement of multiple victims, the strong prima facie evidence collected against the present applicant, and the fact that similarly placed co-accused has already been denied bail by this Court, this Court is of the considered view that it is not a fit case for grant of bail. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Md. Firoz Aalam, involved in Crime No. 21/2025 registered at Police Station – Chalgali, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj, (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) and 319(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. OfÏce 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 Rahul Dewangan