1 2026:CGHC:1953 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 433 of 2026 Mamta Sahu D/o Vishnu Prasad Sahu, Aged About 28 Years Address 1238, Ward No. 7, Govt. School Daldal Sivni, Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Civil Line, District – Raipur (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shivam Mishra, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Dharmendra Shrivastava, Dy. Adv. General Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 13.01.2026 1. This is the 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. 129/2025 registered at Police Station – Civil Lines, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the applicant, along with co- accused persons, was involved in organized cyber fraud and opened multiple bank accounts to deal with proceeds of crime amounting to Rs.64,10,855/-. The accused allegedly assisted in transferring and diverting stolen money obtained through cyber RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 cheating, thereby acting as part of an organized crime syndicate, which led to the registration of alleged offence against the applicant and subsequently, the applicant was arrested. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. It is further submitted that the co-accused Ishika Sharma has been granted bail in the same crime number by the Supreme Court in SLP (Crl) No. 13678/2025 vide order dated 13.10.2025. It is further submitted that no incriminating material or proceeds of crime have been recovered from the applicant. The entire case is based on statements and assumptions without any direct material evidence against the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 26.03.2025, and the conclusion of the trial shall take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the applicant along with co- accused persons, was involved in organized cyber fraud and facilitated the diversion and circulation of proceeds of crime amounting to Rs.64,10,855/- by opening and using multiple bank accounts and further the bail application of the co-accused namely Krishna Ghodesawar and Shabbir Khan has already been rejected by this Court in MCRC Nos. 10455/2025 and 134/2026, vide orders dated 06.01.2026 and 08.01.2026. Therefore, the applicant is not 3 entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. From the perusal of the case, it is revealed that there exists sufficient prima facie material to frame charges against the accused for commission of offences under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), and 111 of the BNS. However, a perusal of the charge-sheet reveals that the accused, in collusion with other co-accused persons, has committed cyber offences and has caused one or more bank accounts to be opened and committed a cyber fraud to the tune of Rs.64,10,855/-. In this manner, it is evident that the accused voluntarily assisted in the transfer and circulation of the property dishonestly obtained through cyber fraud. Moreover, the bail application of the co-accused namely Krishna Ghodesawar and Shabbir Khan has already been rejected by this Court in MCRC Nos. 10455/2025 and 134/2026, vide orders dated 06.01.2026 and 08.01.2026. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, this first bail application of applicant – Mamta Sahu, involved in Crime No. 129/2025 registered at Police Station – Civil Lines, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5) of the BNS, is rejected at this stage. 8. Needless to say that the learned trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed with the trial and conclude the same, expeditiously. 4 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 Rajshekhar