1 2025:CGHC:59268 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8972 of 2025 Laiq Ahmad S/o Ajij Ahamad Aged About 32 Years R/o Mohalla Jawahar Nagar Manikpur, District- Gonda (U.P.). ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through-The Station House OfÏcer, Police Station- Nevai, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rishi Sahu, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 05.12.2025 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. 156/2025 registered at Police Station Nevai Thana, District – Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) read with section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.12.09 11:08:55 +0530 2 2. As per the prosecution story in brief, the complainant lodged a written complaint at the police station stating that on 29.04.2025, the holders of mobile numbers 8473927649, 7077631410, and 7818090229, posing as CBI ofÏcers, made a video call to the complainant’s father and informed him that his Canara Bank account had been sold to one Naresh Goyal, in which an amount of Rs. 2 crores was involved in money laundering. By seeking his cooperation, they obtained all the information about the family members, threatened them with arrest, and fraudulently induced them to deposit a total amount of Rs. 54,90,000/- in different accounts and in various installments between 29.04.2025 and 29.05.2025, thereby committing the offence of cheating. On the basis of the aforesaid written complaint, the police registered a First Information Report bearing Crime No. 156/2025 for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act, 2008, against the accused persons. After completion of the entire investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the concerned court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits the applicant has neither committed nor participated in any act that may amount to any of the offences mentioned above. Moreover, the evidence collected by the prosecution is not prima facie sufÏcient to hold the applicant guilty of the aforesaid offences. He also submits that no role has been attributed to the present applicant in the commission of this alleged crime. He submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and he has bee in jail since 03.09.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel opposes the bail 3 application of the applicant and submits that in compliance of this Court’s order dated 10.11.2025, the concerned Investigating OfÏcer has submitted his personal afÏdavit, stating that the complainant, Namrata Chandrakar, lodged a written complaint stating that on 29.04.2025, unknown persons, posing as CBI ofÏcers using mobile numbers 8473927649, 7077631410, and 7818090229, contacted her father, Shyam Kumar Chandrakar, and claimed that his Canara Bank account had been sold to Naresh Goyal, involving Rs. 2 Crores in money laundering. Under threat, her father and she transferred a total of Rs. 54.90 lakhs between 29.04.2025 and 29.05.2025 into various bank accounts. When the accused demanded an additional Rs. 22 lakhs, the complainant realized it was a fraud. On the basis of the complaint, Crime No. 156/2025 was registered at Police Station Newai, District Durg (C.G.) under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008. The applicant was arrested on 30.05.2025. During investigation, the memorandum statement of the accused was recorded. He admitted that through his friend Sohit, he came into contact with Krishna Kumar @ Krish, Deepak Gupta @ Buddhi @ Babu, and Rajesh Vishwakarma @ Raju Painter, who provided account details to facilitate transactions. He allegedly deposited Rs. 9 lakhs into Rajesh’s Union Bank account on 19.05.2025, withdrew the amount through a self- cheque, and paid Rs. 36,000/- as commission to Krishna, Deepak, and Rajesh, keeping the balance for himself and distributing part of it to associates. During the investigation, the accused’s mobile phone, Aadhaar card, and SIM card used in the alleged transaction were seized in the presence of witnesses, therefore, looking to the seriousness of the offence, the bail application of the present applicant is liable to be 4 dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and in compliance with this Court’s order dated 16.10.2025, the concerned Investigating OfÏcer has submitted his personal afÏdavit. From its perusal, it appears that the complainant, Namrata Chandrakar, alleged that unknown persons, posing as CBI ofÏcers, contacted her father, Shyam Kumar Chandrakar, on 29.04.2025 and falsely claimed that his Canara Bank account had been sold to Naresh Goyal, involving Rs. 2 Crores in money laundering. Under threat, her family transferred Rs. 54.90 lakhs in multiple installments to various bank accounts. On this basis, Crime No. 156/2025 was registered at Police Station Newai, District Durg (C.G.) under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008. During investigation, the applicant allegedly collaborated with his associates to facilitate the transactions, deposited Rs. 9 lakhs into a Union Bank account, and distributed part of the money as commission. The mobile phone, Aadhaar card, and SIM of the applicant used in the alleged transactions were seized during the investigation. Therefore, considering the seriousness of the offence, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant - Laiq Ahmad, involved in Crime No. 156/2025 registered at Police Station Nevai Thana, District – Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) read with section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, is rejected. 5 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 Abhishek