1 2025:CGHC:57816 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9388 of 2025 Om Arya S/o Shri Dev Kumar Arya Aged About 21 Years R/o Mungeli, Sindhi Colony, Purana Bus Stand, Near Main Road, Raipur, C.G., Current R/o 7/333, Sector-02, Behind Taigor School, Shivanand Nagar, Khamtarai District Raipur, C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Civil Line, District Raipur, C.G. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Arun Kukreja, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Supriya Upasane, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27.11.2025 1. This is the Second Bail Application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 44/2025, registered at Police Station- Civil Line, District Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 4011/2025 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 22.05.2025 RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 on merits with liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 3. According to the case of the prosecution, the brief facts of the matter are that the Government of India has established the “Cyber Crime Reporting Portal” and the “1930 Helpline Number” for the prevention of cyber offences, through which victims can report incidents of cyber fraud. Based on the information received through this system, it came to light that a total of 104 bank accounts were opened in Utkarsh Small Finance Bank, Civil Lines Branch, Raipur (IFSC Code: UTKS0001400), which were being used for receiving proceeds of cyber fraud. On the basis of this information and as per the directions issued by the Police Headquarters, Crime No. 44/2025 under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111, and 3(5) of the BNS was registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Raipur against the said 104 bank account holders, and the investigation of the case was entrusted to the Range Cyber Police Station, Raipur. These bank accounts have been identified as “mule accounts,” which were allegedly used by cyber criminals for transferring fraudulently obtained money. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second bail application, earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 4011/2025 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 22.05.2025 on merits with liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. He further submits that the applicant has been in jail since 20.02.2025 and has, therefore, undergone a substantial period of incarceration of nearly nine months by the time this bail 3 application is being considered. It is further submitted that some co- accused first bail application were granted on the ground of lady and the bail applications of others were rejected. The rejection order of four co-accused was challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP Nos. 15006/2025, 12849/2025, 15613/2025 and 17452/2025, wherein the co-accused was granted bail vide order dated 19.11.2025, and therefore, on the ground of parity, the present applicant also deserves to be released on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that this is the applicant’s second bail application and that the earlier application, MCRC No. 4011/2025, was rejected on merits on 22.05.2025 with a direction to conclude the trial expeditiously, further considering that the applicant is in jail since 20.02.2025 and has thus undergone a substantial period of incarceration of nearly nine months, also taking into account that while the bail applications of some co-accused were allowed on the ground of being women accused, the bail applications of others were rejected, and the rejection orders in respect of four co-accused were subsequently challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP Nos. 15006/2025, 12849/2025, 15613/2025 and 17452/2025, wherein 4 the Hon’ble Supreme Court has granted bail vide order dated 19.11.2025, hence this Court is of the considered view that, on the ground of parity, the present applicant also deserves to be released on bail. 8. Let the Applicant – Om Arya, involved in Crime No. 44/2025, registered at Police Station- Civil Line, District Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, 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 on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of her absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him 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 5 court shall initiate proceedings against him, 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 sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 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