1 2026:CGHC:21712 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2362 of 2026 Gagan Deep Singh S/o Awtar Singh, Aged About 21 Years (Wrongly Mentioned In The Annexure P/1 As 86), R/o House No. 42, Street No. 2, Vaishali Nagar, Tehsil And District- Durg (C.G.) --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Vaishali Nagar, Durg District- Durg (C.G.) --- Non-Applicant MCRC No. 3190 of 2026 Manmeet Singh S/o Tara Singh Aged About 25 Years (Incorrectly Mentioned As Manprit Singh) R/o Contractor Colony, Joshi Line, Behind Sparsh Hospital, Supela, Bhilai, Tehsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh ---Applicant Versus State Government Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, S H O, Polikce Station Vaishali Nagar, District Durg Chhattisgarh --- Non-Applicant MCRC No. 3630 of 2026 B. Mohan S/o B. Madhav Rao Aged About 20 Years R/o Camp -1 Steel Nagar Near Shri Bal Ganesh Vikash Samiti Ring Road No 18 P.S. Vaishali Nagar Bhilai Distt- Durg (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The S.H.O. Police Station Vaishali Nagar Distt- Durg (C.G.) --- Non-Applicant PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.05.11 10:36:52 +0530 2 MCRC No. 3326 of 2026 Sachiv Khobragade S/o. Manohar Lal Khobragade Aged About 43 Years R/o. Ambedkar Nagar, Near Pump House, Police Station, Vaishali Nagar, District- Durg (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Sho, Police Station Vaishali Nagar, District - Durg (C.G.) -- Non-Applicant MCRC No. 2748 of 2026 B. Kartik S/o B. Ganesh Aged About 20 Years R/o Camp-01, Road No. 18, Near Atul Provision Stores, Steel Nagar, P.S. Vaishali Nagar, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.)(Presently Lodged In Central Jail, Durg) ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Vaishali Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) --- Non-Applicant For Applicant (MCRC No. 2362 of 2026) : Mr. B.P. Singh, Advocate. For Applicant (MCRC No. 3190 of 2026 and 3326/2026) : Mr. Ankush Soni, Advocate. For Applicant (MCRC No. 3630 of 2026) : Mr. Vipin Tiwari, Advocate. For Applicant (MCRC No. 2748 of 2026) : Mr. Virendra Kashyap, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 0 8.05.2026 1. Since the above-mentioned five bail applications arise out of same crime number, they are clubbed and heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 3 2. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 86/2025, registered at Police Station – Vaishali Nagar, District – Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318(4), 61(2)(A) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) (MCRC Nos. 2362/2026 and 2748/2026), offence under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318(4), 61(2)(A)and 3(5) of the BNS (in MCRC No. 3630/2026) and offence under Sections 318(4), 61(2)(a) and 3(5) of BNS (in MCRC Nos. 3190/2026 and 3326/2026). 3. The case of the prosecution, is that the Government of India has established the “Cyber Crime Reporting Portal” and the “1930 Helpline Number" for the prevention of cyber offences, through which victims can report incidents of cyber fraud. Based on the information received through this system, it came to light that a total of 111 bank accounts were opened in Canara Bank Vaishali Nagar, Durg, District Durg (C.G.), which were being used for receiving proceeds of cyber fraud. On the basis of this information crime has been registered against the said 111 bank account holders, and the investigation of the case was entrusted to the Range Cyber Police Station. These bank accounts have been identified as "mule accounts," which were allegedly used by cyber criminals for transferring fraudulently obtained money. 4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further contended that the applicants’ bank accounts were misused by some other persons and that the applicants had no direct or indirect involvement in the alleged offence. Learned counsel submits that the FIR 4 has been registered collectively against about 111 account holders on the basis of a complaint lodged by the bank authorities, without assigning any specific role to the present applicants. There is no direct evidence available on record to establish that the applicants committed any cyber fraud or personally operated the alleged transactions. It is also submitted that co-accused persons, namely, Suraj Kumar and Nitish Kumar @ D.N., have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 26.02.2026 passed in MCRC Nos. 10058/2025 and 1106/2026, respectively. Learned counsel further submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicants are in custody since 01.06.2025 and 02.06.2025 respectively, they have no previous criminal antecedents, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. Therefore, prayer has been made for grant of bail to the applicants. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that the bail application of two other co-accused persons have already been rejected by this Court in MCRC No.6335 of 2025 and MCRC No.6240 of 2025 vide orders dated 11.08.2025 and 10.09.2025 respectively, and the applicant, namely, Manmeet Singh has one previous criminal antecedents, hence, the applicants are not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicants, and the fact that no criminal antecedents are registered against the present applicants except applicant Manmeet Singh, who has one previous 5 criminal antecedent, this Court has also considered that the bail applications of two other co-accused persons were rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 6335/2025 and MCRC No. 6240/2025 vide orders dated 11.08.2025 and 10.09.2025 respectively, however, considering the fact that co-accused persons, namely, Suraj Kumar and Nitish Kumar @ D.N., have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 26.02.2026 passed in MCRC Nos. 10058/2025 and 1106/2026 respectively, that the charge-sheet has already been filed against the applicants, that the applicants are in custody since 01.06.2025 and 02.06.2025 respectively, and that conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is inclined to allow the present application. 7. Accordingly, the bail applications are allowed. Let the applicants, Gagan Deep Singh, (MCRC No. 2362 of 2026), Manmeet Singh, (MCRC No. 3190 of 2026), B. Mohan (MCRC No. 3630 of 2026), Sachiv Khobragade (MCRC No. 3326 of 2026), B. Kartik (MCRC No. 2748 of 2026) involved in Crime No. 86/2025, registered at Police Station – Vaishali Nagar, District – Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318(4), 61(2)(A) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) (MCRC Nos. 2362/2026 and 2748/2026), offence under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318(4), 61(2)(A)and 3(5) of the BNS (in MCRC No. 3630/2026) and offence under Sections 318(4), 61(2)(a) and 3(5) of BNS (MCRC Nos. 3190/2026 and 3326/2026), be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 6 for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their 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 them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 opinion of the trial court absence of the applicants are deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law. 8. 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 Preeti