1 2026:CGHC:1189 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 134 of 2026 Shabbir Khan S/o Nazir Khan Aged About 38 Years R/o 16/667, Momin Para, Near Dada Bhai Beside Peti Wala Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House O4cer Police Station, Civil Lines Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Navin Shukla, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Dy. Adv. Gen. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08.01.2026 1 The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.129/2025, registered at Police Station – Cyber Range Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the o>ence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111, 3(5) of B.N.S. 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 KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 cheating, thereby acting as part of an organized crime syndicate, which led to the registration of alleged o>ence against the applicant and subsequently, the applicant was arrested. Hence, the bail application. 3 Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid crime and has been made a scapegoat in the present case. It is submitted that no seizure whatsoever has been e>ected from the present applicant and no incriminating material has been recovered from his possession. He further submits that no evidence has been collected from the applicant’s mobile phone which may reBect his participation in any overt act, and there is nothing on record to show that any mule account–related activity was carried out from the applicant’s phone. It is further submitted that the applicant had no knowledge whatsoever that his identity and personal information were being misused for unlawful activities. As per the prosecution case itself, the applicant’s credentials were allegedly used by one Preetam Soni, resident of Bhawani Nagar, Kota, Raipur, for opening a bank account at Bank of Maharashtra, Mova, Raipur (IFSC: MAHB0000439, Account No. 60502631508), and the mobile number 7880023339 registered with the said account did not belong to or was not used by the applicant. It is also alleged that the applicant received only Rs. 5,000/- in lieu of the account opened in his name and that the account kit remained with the said Preetam Soni, which itself shows the limited and peripheral role attributed to the applicant. He further submits that the police 3 authorities have failed to recover any incriminating evidence from the applicant, either digital or otherwise. It is also submitted that one of the co-accused, namely Ishika Singh, has been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 4494/2025, and the case of the present applicant stands on the same footing, entitling him to the beneCt of parity. 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 has already been rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 10455/2025, vide order dated 06.01.2026. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 6 From perusal of the case diary, it prima facie appears that the applicant in collusion with other co-accused persons, involved in organized cyber fraud, facilitated the diversion and circulation of proceeds of crime amounting to Rs.64,10,855/- by opening and using multiple bank accounts, further the material collected during investigation, including the memorandum statement, shows his involvement as part of an organized crime syndicate, further, the 4 co-accused on whom learned counsel for the applicant is placing reliance was granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on the ground that she is a lady, whereas the bail application of an identically situated co-accused, namely Bharat Parihar, has already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 15.12.2025 passed in MCRC No. 9054 of 2025 and further the bail application of the co-accused namely Krishna Ghodesawar has already been rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 10455/2025, vide order dated 06.01.2026. Therefore, considering the seriousness of the allegations, which is of serious economic nature, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on bail. 7 Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Shabbir Khan, involved in Crime No.129/2025, registered at Police Station – Cyber Range Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the o>ence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111, 3(5) of B.N.S., is rejected. 8 Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9 O4ce is directed to send a certiCed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal