Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 12798 (CHH)

SURAJDEV KUMAR v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/10320/2025 · 2026-02-09

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:7431 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10320 of 2025 • Surajdev Kumar S/o Jhagru Ram Aged About 26 Years R/o Padouli, Police Station Chalgali, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) --- Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Basantpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) --- Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Ms. Prachi Diwan, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy.G.A. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10.02.2026 1. This is 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.120/2025 registered at Police Station – Basantpur, District – Balarampur- Ramanujgaj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 411, 413, 414, 419, 120-B, 201 of IPC and Section 66(D) of I.T. Act, 2023. 2. As per prosecution story, in brief, is that as per instruction of the letter dated 05/03/2025 of superintendent of police of VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.02.12 11:01:41 +0530 2 Balrampur, the mutual accounts operated in the police station Basantpur were area investigated. During the investigation the numbers of holders of mutual accounts opened in various banks was found. Upon investigation it was found that one account in HDFS Bank it is operated in the name of Surajdev Kumar whose account number is 50100664723012 and in which 66,154/- has been illegally deposited on 10.12.2023 while taking action on this account holder Surajdev Kumar has been arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is not involved in any alleged offence and has been falsely implicated. It is respectfully submitted that the applicant did not act in the manner alleged by the prosecution and has been implicated solely on the basis of the co-accused's statements. He was arrested merely on suspicion, and no other material is available on record against them. The applicant has no previous criminal record, and have been languishing in jail since 20.06.2025, Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4. Learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that during the investigation it was found that one account in HDFC Bank is operated in the name of present applicant whose bank account number is 50100664723012 and in which 66,154/- has been illegally deposited on 10.12.2023. He also submits that similar situated co-accused person bail applications have also been rejected vide order dated 15.10.2025 in MCRC No.7348 of 2053, therefore, applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case 3 diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and upon perusal of the affidavit filed by the concerned Superintendent of Police, it appears that during the course of investigation, it was found that one account in HDFC Bank is operated in the name of present applicant whose bank account number is 50100664723012 and in which 66,154/- has been illegally deposited on 10.12.2023 and bail application filed by other co- accused person have also been rejected vide order dated 15.10.2025 in MCRC No.7348 of 2053, hence this Court is of the opinion that the present case is not fit for grant of bail and, accordingly, the bail application filed by the applicant is hereby Rejected. 7. Accordingly, this bail application of applicant – Surajdev Kumar, involved in Crime No.120/2025 registered at Police Station – Basantpur, District – Balarampur-Ramanujgaj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 411, 413, 414, 419, 120-B, 201 of IPC and Section 66(D) of I.T. Act, 2023, is rejected at this stage. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. 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 vaishali