1 CGHC010216332026 2026:CGHC:29029 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5192 of 2026 Raja @ Rajesh Bajaj S/o Kishan Bajaj Aged About 34 Years R/o Garden City Mopka Police Station Sarkanda District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus The State of Chhattisgarh Through - The Range Cyber Police Station Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Arjit Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 10.07.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 09/2025, registered at Police Station Range Cyber, District – Bilaspur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 61(2), 317(5), 318(4), 323 and 111(1)(4) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, pursuant to the directions issued by the Police Headquarters for the investigation of mule bank accounts, the Range Cyber Police Station, Bilaspur, received information through the Police JMIS Portal operated by the Central Government regarding ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.07.13 11:47:20 +0530 2 certain bank accounts maintained with Utkarsh Small Finance Bank, Bilaspur. Upon inquiry, it was found that multiple complaints had been lodged on the said portal in respect of 21 bank accounts, and transactions amounting to Rs. 6,46,72,004/- (Rupees Six Crore Forty-Six Lakh Seventy-Two Thousand and Four only) were traced through the said accounts during the period from 04.12.2023 to 13.05.2025. During the course of the investigation, it was alleged that the present applicant had used one of the aforesaid bank accounts to misappropriate funds in connivance with the other accused persons. Consequently, a First Information Report was registered at Range Cyber Police Station, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, bearing Crime No. 9/2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 61(2), 317(5), 318(4), 323, and 111(1)(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and the matter was taken up for investigation. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He submit that the prosecution case is founded solely on cyber cell reports and portal-generated data, which, at best, indicate the routing of funds through the applicant’s bank account. The said material does not establish the applicant’s conscious involvement or criminal intent in the commission of the alleged offence. He also submits that the bank account in question was opened in the applicant’s name by unknown persons, who misled him into providing his documents on the pretext of opening a Jan Dhan account. Thereafter, they took away the passbook, cheque book, and ATM card, falsely stating that the account application had been rejected. He also submits that the name of the applicant does not find mention in the FIR. The applicant has been implicated solely on the basis of the memorandum/statement of a co-accused, which is not admissible in 3 evidencein accordance with law. He further submits that the alleged seizure of a mobile phone and cash from the possession of the applicant is false, fabricated, and concocted. He also submits that the co-accused persons, namely, Karan Singh and Lata Tolani, have been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) Nos. 13305/2025 and 15042/2025, vide orders dated 14.10.2025 and 12.11.2025, respectively. Furthermore, the other co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court. Copies of the said bail orders are filed herewith as Annexure A-4. He submits that the applicant has been in jail since 02.04.2024, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. He submits that the present applicant has 10 criminal antecedents under the Arms Act, IPC, Gambling Act and BNS out of which 02 cases are still pending, which shows that the applicant is a habitual offender. Therefore, he is not entitled to the grant of regular bail in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case also considering the fact that the present applicant has 10 criminal antecedents under the Arms Act, IPC, Gambling Act and BNS out of which 02 cases are still pending, which shows that he is a habitual offender and also in light of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, reported in (2022) 8 SCC 559, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court had cancelled the bail granted to the accused therein on the ground that the accused had previous antecedents, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge 4 the applicant on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Raja @ Rajesh Bajaj, involved in Crime No. 09/2025, registered at Police Station Range Cyber, District – Bilaspur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 61(2), 317(5), 318(4), 323 and 111(1) (4) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. 7. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 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 Abhishek