1 2026:CGHC:6071 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8268 of 2025 Yuvraj Bakal @ Yuvrajsingh S/o Shivnath Bakal Aged About 27 Years R/o Bhakrod P.S. Khivsar, District Nagaur (Rajasthan) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station In-charge, P.S.- Bacheli, District Dantewada (C.G) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Himanshu Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Kumar Jaiswal, Dy. G. A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 03.02.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 29/2025, registered at Police Station : Bacheli, District Dantewada (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 111(1)(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and 66(D) of I.T. Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on the basis of a written report lodged by the complainant, Ramesh Aila, resident of Ward No.02, Andheri Chowk, Bacheli, District Dantewada, it is alleged RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 that during the period between 15.03.2025 and 18.06.2025, he was cheated through an online platform namely “Look Company” (https://77look.com) on the false promise of doubling the invested amount upon completion of certain online tasks. It is alleged that the complainant was initially contacted through a WhatsApp link received from an unknown number, which connected him to a person introducing herself as Alicia, claiming to be the Manager of the Look App, who, by repeated inducements and assurances, persuaded him to invest various amounts. Acting on such inducement, the complainant allegedly deposited multiple sums through QR codes and online transactions in the names of Shaista Praveen and others, amounting in total to Rs.44,346/-. It is further alleged that the accused persons induced the complainant to rope in other persons, pursuant to which a WhatsApp group titled “Look Bacheli Dantewada” was created and further investments were solicited. Subsequently, on 18.06.2025, the accused persons allegedly offered lucrative schemes assuring credit of equivalent amounts within a stipulated period, pursuant to which the complainant opted for a Rs.70,000/- scheme; however, upon the scheduled date of withdrawal, no amount was credited and the accused persons became unresponsive and untraceable. On these allegations, it is contended that the accused persons, by creating a fake online platform and using WhatsApp numbers, dishonestly and fraudulently induced the complainant and others to part with their money, whereupon the applicant was arrested and has therefore preferred the present bail application. 3 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that, prima facie, no offence under the alleged provisions is made out against the applicant and that he has been falsely implicated merely on the basis of suspicion arising out of certain online transactions. It is contended that the applicant has no role whatsoever in creating, operating or managing the alleged fraudulent website or application, nor is there any cogent or direct evidence to establish that he was the actual beneficiary of the alleged fraudulent transactions, as the money trail has not been shown to have been credited to his personal account. He further submits that the entire case rests upon electronic and digital evidence such as mobile numbers, IP addresses and transaction details, all of which are already in the custody of the investigating agency, rendering custodial interrogation of the applicant wholly unnecessary. Lastly, it is submitted that the present applicant has no previous criminal antecedent and he is in jail since 27.08.2025, the applicant is the sole earning member of his family and his continued incarceration would subject his dependent family members to severe financial hardship, and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail in the present case. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel vehemently opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submitted that the charge sheet has been submitted before the competent Court. He further submits that the present case involves a well-planned cyber fraud racket causing loss to multiple innocent victims. It is contended that pursuant to the order dated 15.10.2025 passed by this Hon’ble Court, 4 the Investigating OfÏcer has filed a detailed afÏdavit disclosing the incriminating material collected against the applicant. He submits that during investigation it has been revealed that the applicant actively participated in the cyber crime by collecting and supplying bank accounts, SIM cards and KYC documents to other co-accused, which were used for routing and laundering the fraud proceeds. Statements of the complainant and several other victims have been recorded and bank records obtained, which clearly show that substantial amounts were deposited in accounts arranged by the applicant, including an amount of Rs.70,000/- in a Central Bank account and other transactions forming part of total illegal transactions of Rs.7,91,537/-. It is further submitted that the applicant, in his memorandum statement, has admitted his role in procuring accounts, withdrawing money through ATMs and handing over the same to co-accused persons, and that various incriminating articles including mobile phones, Aadhaar card, ATM cards, passbooks, PAN card and cash have been seized from his possession. Considering the gravity of the offence, the organized manner in which the cyber fraud was committed, the present applicant is not entitled to be granted regular bail in this case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the material placed on record, as well as the afÏdavit filed by the Investigating OfÏcer in compliance of the earlier order of this Court, this Court is of the view that though the 5 prosecution material and the afÏdavit indicate the involvement of the applicant to the extent of facilitating and participating in the transactions as alleged, the investigation appears to be substantially complete, the relevant documents, electronic evidence, bank records and mobile devices have already been seized, and nothing further remains to be recovered from the applicant. Though the allegations are serious in nature, they are predominantly based on documentary and electronic evidence which is already in possession of the prosecution, and custodial interrogation of the applicant is no longer required. Further the fact that the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court and he has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 27.08.2025, the conclusion of the trial may take some more time. Considering the overall facts, the grounds urged by the learned counsel for the applicant, the opposition raised by the learned State counsel through afÏdavit, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Yuvraj Bakal @ Yuvrajsingh, involved in Crime No. 29/2025, registered at Police Station : Bacheli, District Dantewada (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 111(1)(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and 66(D) of I.T. Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- 6 (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 his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS is issued and the applicant fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial 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 7 of liberty of bail and proceed against him, in accordance with law. 8. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan