1 2025:CGHC:55828 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9224 of 2025 Kamleshwar Mugri S/o Gajendra Singh Aged About 47 Years R/o Block No. 19, Room No. 17, Bsup Colony, Near Sector-3, Saddu Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station Civil Line Police Station Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 17.11.2025 1. This is the First 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. 129/2025 registered at Police Station – Civil Line, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant has made complaint to the concerned police station alleging inter-alia is that the accused persons were transferred some amount of complainant in their bank account. Based upon the such complaint of the complainant, police has registered FIR against the applicant and RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 other accused persons for the offence u/s 317(2), 317(4), 317(5),, 111(3), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita. Hence, this application. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. It is further submitted that no incriminating material or proceeds of crime have been recovered from the applicant. The entire case is based on statements and assumptions without any direct material evidence against the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 26.03.2025, and the conclusion of the trial shall take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that from the perusal of the case-diary it transpires that the accusations against the applicant are of a grave and serious nature involving organized cyber-financial fraud wherein the applicant knowingly allowed his bank account to be used as a mule account for receiving proceeds of online cheating committed across various States of the country. As many as 128 mule accounts were detected in the concerned branch of Bank of Maharashtra and the applicant’s account 60499948663 alone reflects suspicious transactions amounting to Rs. 12,11,341/-, including Rs. 25,000/- received directly from victims of cyber fraud as per Cyber Crime Portal Acknowledgment No. 33101240008876. The applicant not only opened the account at the behest of one Gopal Tandi but also sold the entire bank account kit including ATM card, passbook, and registered mobile number in consideration of Rs. 2,500/-, thereby 3 facilitating cyber criminals in siphoning off fraudulently obtained funds. 5. It is further submitted by learned State counsel that despite issuance of notices under Sections 35(3) and 94 of the B.N.S.S., the applicant failed to produce any document or explanation justifying the suspicious financial inflow, clearly indicating his deliberate involvement and conscious participation in the unlawful activity. The applicant’s account has been flagged in ten separate cyber-fraud complaints across multiple States, demonstrating his deep nexus with an inter-State cybercrime syndicate. So far as the other co- accused persons are concerned, there bail application have already been rejected by this Court vide orders dated 12.09.2025 and 31.10.2025 passed in MCRC Nos. 7344/2025 and 8661/2025, respectively. As such, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. From the perusal of the records as well as the bail rejection order of the trial Court concerned, and considering the overall incriminating facts and circumstances emerging from the case diary, it is evident that the applicant played an active and conscious role in facilitating a large-scale cyber-fraud operation by deliberately opening and thereafter selling his bank account and related credentials to cyber criminals, thereby enabling them to receive and circulate fraudulently obtained funds. The applicant’s bank account reflects suspicious transactions exceeding Rs. 12 lakh, stands directly 4 implicated in ten cyber-fraud cases from different States, and the applicant has shown deliberate non-cooperation by failing to produce any documents or satisfactory explanation despite statutory notices. These circumstances clearly establish his involvement in the crime and demonstrate that he is an essential link in the chain of cyber-financial fraud. So far as the other co-accused persons are concerned, there bail application have already been rejected by this Court vide orders dated 12.09.2025 and 31.10.2025 passed in MCRC Nos. 7344/2025 and 8661/2025, respectively. In view of these incriminating circumstances and the applicant’s specific role in facilitating the crime. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 8. Accordingly, this first bail application of applicant – Kamleshwar Mugri involved in Crime No. 129/2025 registered at Police Station – Civil Line, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111(3) and 3(5) of the BNS, is rejected at this stage. 9. Needless to say that the learned trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed with the trial and conclude the same, 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 Rajshekhar