1 2026:CGHC:26329 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5577 of 2026 Ishwar Singh Ghritlahre S/o Mahetaru Ram Ghritlahre Aged About 47 Years R/o Village Semarkona, Police Station - Fasterpur, Tahsil and District - Mungeli (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- City Kotwali Mungeli, District - Mungeli (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Chandrikaditya Pandey, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Saumay Rai, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29/06/2026 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 77/2025, registered at Police Station - City Kotwali Mungeli, District - Mungeli (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 111, 317(2), 317(4), 317(5) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 20.06.2025 passed in MCRC No. 2908/2025. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, through the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.06.30 15:04:15 +0530 2 Centre (I4C), sent a letter dated 02.03.2025 to the Cyber Cell, Mungeli, stating that an amount of Rs. 5,76,648/- had been fraudulently deposited in several bank accounts maintained in different bank branches situated in District Mungeli during the period from 01.01.2024 to 28.02.2025. The letter further stated that the said bank accounts had been opened for the purpose of receiving proceeds of cyber fraud and were knowingly used for routing illegally obtained money. On the basis of the said communication, Police Station City Kotwali, Mungeli, registered the present crime. During the course of investigation, it was allegedly found that the present applicant had assisted the co-accused persons in procuring bank accounts of villagers for the commission of cyber fraud. It was further found that the bank account of co-accused Sanjeev Jangde reflected transactions amounting to approximately Rs. 1.30 crore. Consequently, the FIR was registered against the present applicant along with the other co-accused. The allegation against the present applicant is that he facilitated the co-accused in obtaining bank accounts for the commission of the offence. However, no incriminating article was seized from the possession of the present applicant or the co-accused, namely, Chelak Ram Sahu and Sanjeev Jangde. During the investigation, the police seized documents relating to various bank accounts maintained with UCO Bank, Punjab National Bank, Axis Bank, and other banks. The present applicant and the co-accused were arrested, statements of witnesses were recorded, and upon completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the arrested accused persons. The final report also stated that further investigation against the remaining accused persons and mule account holders was continuing under Section 193(9) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Copies of the First Information Report, the application seeking permission for further 3 investigation against the absconding accused persons under Section 193(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and the letter dated 02.03.2025 are collectively filed herewith as Annexure A-3. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first bail application filed by the applicant was dismissed on merits by this Court vide order dated 20.06.2025. It is further submitted that this is the second bail application. Learned counsel further submits that, so far as the progress of the trial is concerned, all 13 prosecution witnesses cited in the original charge-sheet have already been examined. However, subsequently, four other accused persons were arrested and a supplementary charge-sheet has been filed against them. Consequently, the prosecution witnesses are required to be examined afresh in respect of the supplementary charge-sheet, and therefore, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. It is further submitted that the applicant has only one previous criminal antecedent and has been in judicial custody since 21.03.2025. On these grounds, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application. He further submits that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on the ground that the present applicant has given his bank account Number, Aadhar card, ATM Card and mobile Number to the upper layer person who was involved in the said fraud and due to which, the online fraud was committed by the accused person and the complainant has suffered of huge amount i.e. 1 Crores 30 lakhs, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 4 7. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the nature and gravity of the allegations, the material available on record, the fact that this is the second bail application, the applicant's period of incarceration since 21.03.2025, and the status of the trial, this Court finds that all the prosecution witnesses cited in the original charge-sheet have already been examined, although a supplementary charge-sheet has subsequently been filed against four newly arrested accused persons, the trial against the present applicant is at the verge of its completion, and only the remaining procedural stages are yet to be concluded, accordingly, the present bail application is disposed of. 8. The trial Court is directed to proceed with the matter expeditiously and make every endeavour to conclude the trial by passing an appropriate judgment, in accordance with law, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti