1 2026:CGHC:2202 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 145 of 2026 Vyas Narayan S/o Gaya Ram Gond, Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Khaira, Post Jairam Nagar Bilaspur, Police Station Masturi, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Cyber Range Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 14/01/2026 1. This is the Second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 08/2025 registered at Police Station, Cyber Range Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 61, 317(5), 318(4), 111(3)(4) and 323 of BNS. 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant has already been rejected by this Court being MCRC No. 6312/2025, vide order KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 dated 08.08.2025 on merits. Hence, this second bail application. 3. As per the prosecution story, in brief, on the basis of information received through the Samanvaya Portal operated by the Government of India, various banks, and the Police Headquarters, and after due investigation, it was revealed that amounts of money were fraudulently withdrawn from the bank accounts of several account holders without their consent. It is further alleged that such “mule accounts” were used for siphoning and transferring the proceeds of crime, thereby causing financial loss to the victims. The allegation against the present applicant is that he provided his documents for the purpose of opening a bank account for the co- accused and that the said account was subsequently used for suspicious financial transactions. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that although an earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 6312/2025 vide order dated 08.08.2025, the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that there is no direct allegation against the applicant with regard to the theft or siphoning of money from the bank account of any victim. The applicant has been arrested solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of a co-accused, which is inadmissible in criminal jurisprudence. He further submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed, no recovery has been effected from the present applicant and even the alleged suspicious bank account has not been recovered from his possession. It is also submitted that the police have failed to trace the alleged victim whose bank 3 account was purportedly misused and no stolen amount has been recovered from the applicant. He further submits that the co- accused, whose bail applications were earlier rejected by this Court, have subsequently been enlarged on bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) Nos. 10726 of 2025 and 11402 of 2025 vide orders dated 16.09.2025 and 09.10.2025, respectively, and thereafter the remaining co-accused have also been granted bail by this Court. Copies of the orders passed by this Court are filed herewith as Annexure A-4 (collectively). It is further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent. Looking to the present status of the case, it is apparent that the trial is likely to take a considerable time to conclude. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submitted that the first bail application of the applicant, being MCRC No. 6312/2025, has already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 08.08.2025 on merits. Hence, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the case diary and material available on record, it is evident that the allegation against the present applicant is limited to providing documents for opening a bank account, which was allegedly used by the co-accused for suspicious transactions. There is no direct 4 allegation against the applicant regarding withdrawal or siphoning of money from the bank account of any victim. The applicant has been arrested solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of a co- accused and no recovery, either of stolen money or of the alleged suspicious bank account, has been effected from his possession. The charge-sheet has already been filed and the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents. This Court also takes note of the fact that although the bail applications of the co-accused were earlier rejected by this Court, the Supreme Court, in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) Nos. 10726 of 2025 and 11402 of 2025, vide orders dated 16.09.2025 and 09.10.2025 respectively, has been pleased to enlarge the said co-accused on bail. Thereafter, the remaining co-accused have also been granted bail by this Court. Thus, the present applicant stands on a similar footing and is entitled to the benefit of parity. 8. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, absence of direct involvement, filing of charge- sheet, lack of recovery, the parity with co-accused who have already been granted bail and keeping in view that the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 9. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 10.Let the Applicant – Vyas Narayan, involved in Crime No. 08/2025 registered at Police Station, Cyber Range Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 61, 317(5), 5 318(4), 111(3)(4) and 323 of BNS, be released on bail on his 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 his 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 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 6 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. 11. 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 Kunal