1 2025:CGHC:54675 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6976 of 2025 Sanjay Kumar Sharma S/o Suresh Kumar Sharma Aged About 30 Years R/o House No. 31, Near Chandrama Chowk, Shivaji Nagar, Khursipar, Police Station- Khursipar, Durg, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through, Police Station Range Cyber P.S. Durg, District- Durg (C.G.) (As Per Charge Sheet) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar Singh, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate SB : Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice ORDER ON BOARD 10/11/2025 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. 03/2025 registered at Ranger Cyber P.S. – Durg, District – Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 317 (2), 317 (4), 318 (4), 61 (2) (A) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66 (d) of the Information Technology Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Police Station Range Cyber, P.S. Durg received an information from Bhartiya Cyber Apradh Samanvay Kendra Coordination Portal operated by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, regarding mule accounts in the Bandhan Bank Branch at Smriti Nagar, 2 Hi-Tech Hospital, Bhilai, District Durg, IFSC Code BDBL0002284 and further, received information of 13 mule bank accounts and upon investigation, FIR was registered and total 13 accounts were identified, the account holders were implicated in crime and the police authorities informed to bank regarding the mule accounts and upon further investigation, a significant fraudulent deposits, including Rs. 40,45,600/- in the bank account of co- accused Anshul Tiwari and Rs.65,000/- in the bank account of co-accused Lalit Kumar Chauhan and Rs.45,000/- in the account of present applicant. Upon recording their statement, the accused persons admitted to either sell or misuse their bank accounts for fraudulent activities and upon completion of investigation charge sheet has been filed before the competent Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that the similarly situated co-accused person namely, Premprakash Bandhe had also filed a bail application bearing MCRC No. 5205/2025 which was rejected vide order dated 17.07.2025 by this Court, against which, the co-accused filed a Special Leave to Appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court bearing SLP (Cr.) No. 15173/2025 in which, the Hon’ble Supreme Court granted bail to the co-accused i.e. Premprakash Bandhe vide order dated 25.09.2025. He submits that the applicant is only an RTO agent and has no nexus to online fraud. Further, no seizure has been made from the present applicant and the account of the applicant was misused by some other person. There is no role played by the present applicant in commission of the aforesaid crime. He further submits that no criminal antecedents is registered against the applicant. Applicant is in jail since 24.03.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been 3 submitted before the competent Court in the present case. However, she submits that there specific allegations against the applicant of commission of aforesaid fraud by committing the offence of cheating. However, he do not dispute the submission of counsel for the applicant regarding the criminal antecedents of the applicant and the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Cr.) No. 15173/2025. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of dispute and material available in case diary and the fact that, applicant is having no criminal antecedent against him, further, the co-accused person Premprakash Bandhe has been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Cr.) No. 15173/2025 vide order dated 25.09.2025, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, period of pre-trial detention, without further commenting anything on merits, this Court finds it appropriate to grant bail to the applicants. 7. 7. Let the Applicant – Sanjay Kumar Sharma, involved in Crime No. 03/2025 registered at Range Cyber PS – Durg, District – Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under 317 (2), 317 (4), 318 (4), 61 (2) (A) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66 (d) of the Information Technology Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court 4 on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against his under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law. 8. 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 Dey SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY