1 CGHC010165582026 2026:CGHC:28843 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3933 of 2026 Mitesh Chandrakant Chutke S/o Chandrakant Chutke Aged About 32 Years R/o A- 11, Harikunj Society, Mukundnagar, Pune P.S. Kharget, District- Pune Maharashtra ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Range Cyber Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Shivam Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 09.07.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 557/2025 registered at Police Station- Range Cyber, District- Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 3(5) and 111(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, who was working as DGM at NTPC, Sipat, was added to a WhatsApp group namely "18 Days Winning Trade", where he was induced to invest money in the share market on the assurance of earning huge profits. Acting on such inducement, during the period from 11.08.2025 to 16.09.2025, the complainant transferred a total amount of ₹1,97,81,892/- into different bank accounts as instructed by the members of the said group and was thereby cheated. During investigation, it was revealed that the main accused, Dhananjay Aburao Salve, along with the present applicant and other co- accused persons, in furtherance of their criminal conspiracy, facilitated the operation of bank accounts used for the commission of the cyber fraud. Accordingly, the applicant was arrested on 19.02.2026 and, after completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed against him for the aforesaid offences. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no connection with the alleged cyber fraud. He further submit that the applicant was working as Premier Acquisition Manager in IDFC First Bank, Pune, and has been implicated merely on the basis of the memorandum statement of the co-accused without any independent incriminating material. It is further submitted that no amount of the cheated money was ever credited to the account of the applicant nor has any incriminating article connected with the offence been recovered from his possession. Learned counsel further submit that the applicant has no previous criminal 3 antecedents, is suffering from depression, anxiety and hypertension, has been in custody since 19.02.2026, charge-sheet has already been filed and, therefore, no further custodial interrogation is required. Hence, it is prayed that the applicant be released on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that the present case pertains to a well-organized cyber fraud involving cheating of ₹1,97,81,892/- from the complainant through fake online share trading schemes. He further submit that the applicant was not merely a bank employee but was an active participant in the criminal conspiracy. It is submitted that, in compliance with the order dated 29.04.2026 passed by this Court, the Investigating Officer has filed his personal affidavit disclosing the evidence collected against the applicant. As per the affidavit, during investigation it has surfaced that the applicant facilitated opening of bank accounts for the members of the cyber fraud syndicate, retained the passbooks, ATM cards and linked mobile numbers, received commission for such activities and also received cash withdrawn from the fraudulently operated accounts. It is further submitted that electronic evidence, bank account details, memorandum statements and other documentary material collected during investigation prima facie establish the active involvement of the applicant in the organized cyber fraud. Therefore, considering the seriousness of the offence and the material available on record, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 4 5. In compliance with the order dated 29.04.2026 passed by this Court, the concerned Investigating Officer has filed his personal affidavit disclosing the evidence collected during the course of investigation against the present applicant. The affidavit, inter alia, discloses that during investigation the memorandum statements of the applicant as well as the co-accused persons were recorded, which reveal the role attributed to the applicant in facilitating the opening and operation of bank accounts used for commission of the cyber fraud. The affidavit further discloses that electronic evidence, bank account details and other documentary material collected during investigation prima facie indicate the active participation of the applicant in the organized cyber fraud. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, the allegation that the complainant was cheated of ₹1,97,81,892/- through an organized cyber fraud, the material collected during investigation, the evidence disclosed by the Investigating Officer in his personal affidavit filed pursuant to the order dated 29.04.2026, which prima facie indicates the active involvement of the applicant in facilitating the opening and operation of bank accounts used for commission of the offence as well as his participation in the criminal conspiracy and considering the seriousness of the allegations and the electronic and documentary evidence collected during investigation, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail at this stage. 5 8. 5 8. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant – Mitesh Chandrakant Chutke, involved in Crime No. 557/2025 registered at Police Station- Range Cyber, District- Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 3(5) and 111(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, is rejected. 9. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 10. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice . Kunal