1 2026:CGHC:22618 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4505 of 2026 Ajay Sahu S/o Madhuram Sahu Aged About 30 Years R/o Near Riya Ped, Gokul Nagar, P.S. Gudiyari, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Cyber Range, Civil Lines District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13.05.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this Third Bail Application under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 129/2025, registered at Police Station- Cyber Range, Civil Lines, Raipur, District : Raipur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111(3) and 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The First bail and Second bail applications of the applicant were rejected by this Court being MCRC No. 3750/2025 and MCRC No. 1125/2026 respectively, vide order dated 27.06.2025 and KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 12.03.2026 respectively, on merits. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a bank account numbered 60486847875 registered in the name of the applicant/accused exists in Bank of Maharashtra, Raipur Branch, with IFSC Code MAHB0002335. The mobile number 999334xxxx is registered with this account and a total sum of ₹58,41,876/- is reported to be deposited in it. An online complaint regarding cyber fraud was lodged on 25.04.2024 by the complainant Ramkali Jatav and another person, related to a financial transaction of ₹1,833/- in the above-mentioned account, under acknowledgment number 32107240022785. It is reported that under the same IFSC code, MAHB0002335, a total of 21 accounts are flagged as mule accounts. The case diary includes the account statement of account number 60486847875, maintained by the accused, covering the period from 06.04.2024 to 30.08.2024. Upon reviewing the statement, it is observed that around 30 to 40 transactions per day were made consistently. The credited amounts include transactions of ₹2,000/-, ₹5,000/-, ₹10,000/-, ₹500/-, ₹50,000/-, ₹3,000/-, and other such sums on a daily basis, indicating a highly unusual pattern of financial behavior. Therefore, the case has been registered against the accused at Cyber Police Station Range, Raipur under Crime No. 129/2025 for offences under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111(3), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (B.N.S.). 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first and second bail applications of the applicant were rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 3750/2025 and MCRC No. 1125/2026 vide orders 3 dated 27.06.2025 and 12.03.2026 respectively, on merits. It is further submitted that the new ground for filing the present third bail application is that one of the co-accused, namely Ishika Singh, whose bail application was also rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 5467/2025 vide order dated 14.07.2025, preferred SLP (CRL) No. 13678/2025 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and vide order dated 13.10.2025, she was granted bail by the Hon’ble Apex Court. It is further submitted that on the basis of the aforesaid order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, another co-accused, namely Abhinav Nagwanshi, whose first bail application had already been rejected by this Court, preferred a second bail application before this Court and was granted bail on the ground of parity with co- accused Ishika Singh. Learned counsel submits that the case of the present applicant is similar to that of the co-accused persons who have already been granted bail and therefore, on the ground of parity, he prays for grant of bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that although the Hon’ble Supreme Court granted bail to the co-accused, namely Ishika Singh, and thereafter, on the ground of parity, some of the other co-accused persons were also enlarged on regular bail by this Court, the bail application of another co-accused, namely Sahil Jethwani, along with other co- accused persons, was rejected by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a bunch case being SLP (Crl) No. 166/2026 and this material fact was concealed by the applicant. It is further pointed out that the bail application of the two co-accused persons namely Vishal Tandi and 4 Mohhamad Aman have been rejected by this Court vide order dated 12.05.2026. Therefore, the bail application of the present applicant is also liable to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. From perusal of the records, it transpires that the First bail and Second bail applications of the applicant were rejected by this Court being MCRC No. 3750/2025 and MCRC No. 1125/2026 respectively, vide orders dated 27.06.2025 and 12.03.2026 respectively, on merits. 8. It has been brought to the notice of this Court that after the rejection of the first bail application of the co-accused Harsh Soni, he preferred an SLP before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, bearing SLP (Crl.) No. 56/2026, which was heard along with the cases of other co-accused persons in a bunch of matters, the leading case being Sahil Jethwani vs. State of Chhattisgarh in SLP (Crl.) No. 166 of 2026. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide order dated 02.04.2026, rejected the bail applications while directing the concerned trial Court to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within a period of three months from the date of passing of the said order. It is evident that although the Hon’ble Supreme Court had rejected the bail application of the co-accused namely Harsh Soni, this material fact was concealed by the learned counsel for the co-accused namely Harsh Soni, while claiming parity with another co-accused, namely Jayant Ghosh, who was granted bail by this Court solely on the ground that co-accused Ishika Singh had been granted bail by 5 the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 13.10.2025. However, subsequently, the bail application of the co-accused namely Harsh Soni, was specifically rejected by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 02.04.2026. 9. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the bail application of the co-accused namely Harsh Soni, has already been rejected by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 02.04.2026, with a specific direction to the trial Court to expedite and conclude the trial within the stipulated period, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present bail application. 10. Moreover, the applicant has sought to claim parity with certain co- accused persons while concealing the material fact of rejection of co-accused’s bail application by the Supreme Court, which disentitles him from seeking such relief. In view of the rejection of bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the absence of any substantial change in circumstances and considering the gravity of the allegations furthermore, yesterday this Court has rejected the bail application of the similarly situated co-accused namely Mohammad Aman and Vishal Tandi being MCRC No. 4424/2026 and MCRC No. 4429/2026 respectively, this Court finds no ground to grant bail to the present applicant. 11. In view of above, the bail applications of the applicant namely – Ajay Sahu involved in Crime No. 129/2025, registered at Police Station Cyber Range Civil Lines, Raipur, District : Raipur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 6 and 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. 12. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 13. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal