1 2026:CGHC:7370 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10257 of 2025 • Arun Kumar Mehta S/o Jawahr Mehta Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Ward No. 05, Schoolpara Nagara, P.S. Ramanujganj, District- Balrampur-Ramanaujganj, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Surajpur, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Inforamtion System) For Applicant : Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy.G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10.02.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 506/2025 registered at Police Station Surajpur, District - Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 413 and 120(B) and Section 66(D) of I.T. Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that The perusal of the records shows that on occurrence of cyber fraud, various victims have lodged their complaints online on Layer-1 operated in various bank VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.02.12 15:20:02 +0530 2 branches in the coordination portal operated by the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre, in respect of which the investigation report along with documents has been received from the office of the Inspector General of Police for registering the crime related to the mule account. The mule account in the above list is related to the complaints of online cyber fraud of account holder the applicant, account number 60477567649 of Maharashtra Bank, Surajpur, district Surajpur branch (CG), Acknowledgement No. 20803240022430, 331032400405 The transaction details of the account were obtained from the said bank branch. On studying the said transaction details, it was found that the applicant, holder of the said account number, had given his bank account to the criminal/gang concerned for using it for cybercrime fraud in a planned manner with the aim of earning money. The accused has committed a total cyber fraud of Rs 1,10,000/-. The case was taken up for investigation. During the investigation, the accused were taken into custody and questioned, and they confessed to the crime. Hence this offence. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. The applicant had no knowledge that his bank account or documents were being misused for cyber fraud. He was misled by co-accused Shankar Thakur under the pretext of arranging a bank loan, for which he had submitted his Aadhaar card, PAN card, and SIM card. The applicant handed over his newly opened bank account and mobile SIM only on the assurance of getting a loan, without any intention or knowledge of facilitating any fraudulent activity. It is further contended that applicant has no criminal antecedent and the applicant is in jail since 3 18.09.2025 and the conclusion of trial is likely to take some time, therefore, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that there is no criminal antecedent registered against the present applicant, and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submits that in compliance of the Court’s order dated 11/12/2025, the Investigating Officer has filed his personal affidavit. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. In compliance of the Court’s order dated 11/12/2025, the Investigating Officer, Surajpur has filed his personal affidavit wherein relevant paragraphs which reads as under:- “ xxx xxx xxx 9. That, during investigation, it was found that, there was a complaint regarding online financial fraud/crime of total Rs. 1.10 from the victims through the aforesaid bank account of the present accused applicant between the period 27.03.2024 (Rs. 20,000/-) and on 29.03.2024 (Rs. 90,000/-) vide aforesaid complaint acknowledgement number vide Bank of Maharashtra Account Number 60477567649 of the present accused applicant. 10. That, during investigation, it was found that, the total transactions into the aforesaid bank account of the present accused applicant is Rs. 1,25,05,736.44/-, which has been credited into the aforesaid bank account of the present accused applicant through online cyber fraud committed with the various innocent victims of the various State of the country and a total amount of Rs. 1,24,52,040.49/- has been withdrawn by the accused persons during the short span of time period from 25.01.2024 to 29.04.2024. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions 4 made by learned counsel for the party, allegation levelled against the present and involvement of present applicant, further during investigation, it was found that, there was a complaint regarding online financial fraud/crime of total Rs. 1.10 from the victims through the bank account of the present accused applicant between the period 27.03.2024 (Rs.20,000/-) and on 29.03.2024 (Rs. 90,000/-) vide aforesaid complaint acknowledgment number vide Bank of Maharashtra Account Number 60477567649 of the present accused applicant and total transactions into the aforesaid bank account of the present accused applicant is Rs.1,25,05,736.44/-, which has been credited into the aforesaid bank account of the present accused applicant through online cyber fraud committed with the various innocent victims of the various State of the country and a total amount of Rs. 1,24,52,040.49/- has been withdrawn by the accused persons during the short span of time period from 25.01.2024 to 29.04.2024, hence this Court does not find it to be a fit case to release the applicant on regular bail. 8. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant- Arun Kumar Mehta, involved in Crime No.506/2025 registered at Police Station Surajpur, District - Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 413 and 120(B) and Section 66(D) of I.T. Act, is rejected at this stage. 9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali