1 2026:CGHC:23811 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 708 of 2026 Kavindra Yadav S/o. Late Bechan Yadav Aged About 41 Years R/o. House No. 306, Ward No. 15, Fauji Nagar, Bhilai, Police Station- Jamul, District- Durg (C.G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station- Cyber Range, Durg, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Shri Dhirendra Prasad Mishra, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy.G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 15/06/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of anticipatory bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.03/2025, registered at Police Station Cyber Range, Durg, District Durg (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2026.06.16 17:39:01 +0530 2 Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318(4) and 61(2)A of B.N.S and Section 66(D) of the IT Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the Police Station, Range Cyber P.S. Durg received information from the Bhartiya Cyber Apradh Samanvay Kendra (Coordination Portal) operated by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, regarding mule accounts operating in Bandhan Bank, Smriti Nagar Branch, Hi-Tek Hospital, Bhilai, District Durg, IFSC Code BDBL0002284. The information revealed a total of 13 mule bank accounts. Upon inquiry, an FIR was registered, and during investigation, all 13 accounts were identified, leading to the implication of the respective account holders in the present offence. The police personnel also informed the concerned bank regarding these mule accounts. During investigation, it was found that significant fraudulent deposits had been made, including Rs. 40,45,600/ in the account of co- accused Anshul Tiwari, Rs. 65,000/- in the account of co-accused Lalit Kumar Chauhan, and Rs. 45,000/- in the account of co-accused Sanjay Kumar Sharma. The accused persons admitted to either selling or misusing their bank accounts for fraudulent activities. Based on the memorandum statements of the co-accused, the present applicant has been implicated on the allegation that he used to provide his bank account to the co-accused and received Rs. 20,000/- in return. After completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He would submit that the applicant is a registered shop owner and has no connection with the alleged cyber fraud except that certain transactions were 3 traced to his bank account and mere receipt of money in his account does not establish his involvement in the offence, and there is no material to show that he contacted the complainant, made any false representation, or participated in any fraudulent scheme. It is further submitted that the entire case is based on documentary and electronic evidence already in possession of the prosecution, and no recovery or custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. He would further submit that similarly placed co-accused persons have already been granted regular bail and the applicant's case stands on the same footing. He would submit that the applicant is ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by all the directions and conditions which may be imposed by this Court, applicant is a permanent resident of address mentioned in the cause title and there is no chance of his absconding, therefore he prays to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. He would submit that in compliance of the court’s order dated 11/05/2026 concerned Investigating Officer has filed his personal affidavit. He would submit that allegation against the applicant is that an amount of Rs.1,17,79,245.60/- was credited and Rs.1,17,79,239.01/- was debited in his Bandhan Bank account within a short period from 01.12.2024 to 17.02.2025 and also as many as 13 online cyber complaints from victims across different States have been registered on the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal alleging that the said bank account was used in commission of online financial fraud. He would further submit that considering the nature and gravity 4 of the allegations and the applicant's alleged involvement in the cyber fraud, the applicant is not entitled for the benefit of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submission of learned counsel for the parties, materials available on record, further the fact that an amount of Rs.1,17,79,245.60/- was credited and Rs.1,17,79,239.01/- was debited from the applicant's bank account within a short span of time and that 13 cyber fraud complaints from victims across different States have been linked to the said account, considering the nature and gravity of the allegations and also considering the fact that investigation is still going on, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant - Kavindra Yadav, involved in Crime No.03/2025, registered at Police Station Cyber Range, Durg, District Durg (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318(4) and 61(2)A of B.N.S and Section 66(D) of the IT Act is rejected. Sd/-Sd S Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice gouri