1 CGHC010172402026 2026:CGHC:29969 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4038 of 2026 Rahul Kumar Jatav S/o. Prakash Jatav Aged About 22 Years R/o. Ward No. 46, Gali No. 01, Shri Ganganagar, Police Station Jawahar Nagar, District- Shri Ganganagar (Rajasthan), Permanent Addres Village Lalpur, Police Station Pakewar, District- Etawah (Uttar Pradesh) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station City Kotwali Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rahil Arun Kochar, Advocate along with Mr. Vaibhav Mittal, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 15.07.2026 1. This is the first 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. 429/2025 registered at Police Station- City Kotwali, Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 409, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 01.05.2025, complainant Sajan Singh Patel lodged a written report at Police Station City Kotwali, Balodabazar, alleging that in March 2024 his mobile number was added to a WhatsApp group named “Goblewealth Increasers”, wherein the members and administrators of the group represented themselves as online trading experts and induced participants to invest money in trading and IPO-related activities. It is alleged that acting upon the instructions of the persons operating the group, the complainant initially transferred various amounts through Google Pay, UPI transactions, and RTGS to different bank accounts and UPI IDs provided by them. Thereafter, under the pretext of trading investments, IPO allotments, and payment of taxes for withdrawal of profits, the complainant was induced to make multiple transfers amounting in aggregate to Rs. 25,58,317/-. Subsequently, when the promised returns were not received, the complainant realized that he had been cheated and lodged the report. During investigation, it was revealed that one of the bank accounts into which a portion of the defrauded amount had been transferred, namely Account No. 42968579288 maintained in the name of proprietorship concern “Shri Jagdamba Boxes”, allegedly belongs to the present applicant. On the basis of the material collected during investigation, the applicant was brought on transit remand from Kurukshetra, Haryana, formally arrested on 24.06.2025, and after completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against him and co-accused Ankit Modi for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, and 34 of the Indian Penal 3 Code, while the other co-accused persons are stated to be absconding. The applicant is presently in judicial custody. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged and that the essential ingredient of criminal intent or mens rea is wholly absent in the present matter. He further submits that the applicant is a poorly educated rural labourer earning his livelihood through daily wages and was merely used as a conduit by the actual perpetrators of the alleged cyber fraud. It is argued that co-accused Ankit Modi, taking advantage of the applicant’s financial condition and lack of banking knowledge, induced him to open a bank account and thereafter retained control over the account and its credentials. He points out that though the complainant has alleged a fraud of Rs. 25,58,317/-, the investigating agency has traced only Rs. 10,000/- to the bank account standing in the name of the applicant and there is no material to show that the applicant was either a beneficiary of the alleged fraud or had knowledge of the transactions. It is further submitted that the applicant was neither a member of the alleged WhatsApp group “Goblewealth Increasers” nor did he have any communication with the complainant, and that the entire fraudulent operation was allegedly conducted by the other accused persons who misused the applicant’s identity and bank account. He also submits that the applicant’s case stands on a stronger footing than 4 that of co-accused Ankit Modi, who, according to the prosecution case itself, had obtained the applicant’s bank account details and was actively involved in the alleged transactions. It is further submitted that the said co-accused Ankit Modi has already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court in MCRC No. 1800 of 2026 vide order dated 13.04.2026. He also submits that the applicant has two previous criminal antecedents in which he is on bail, and he is in jail since 24.06.2025, the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, but could not dispute the fact that co-accused person has already been granted bail by this Court. He also submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature and pertain to a well-organized cyber fraud whereby the complainant was dishonestly induced to part with a substantial amount of Rs. 25,58,317/-. It is contended that during the course of investigation, material has been collected indicating that the bank account standing in the name of the applicant was utilized for routing a part of the defrauded amount and, therefore, his involvement in the alleged offence cannot be ruled out at this stage. It is also argued that the offence involves economic fraud committed through cyber means, which has serious repercussions on society and requires a strict approach. He further submits that the applicant has two other criminal antecedents in the State of 5 Haryana, in which he has been granted bail, indicating his prior involvement in similar criminal activities. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the material collected during investigation, the applicant’s criminal antecedents, and the possibility of his influencing the course of trial, he prays that the bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the material available on record, the fact that the prosecution has traced only an amount of Rs. 10,000/- to the bank account standing in the name of the present applicant out of the total alleged defrauded amount of Rs. 25,58,317/-, the contention of the applicant that he was not a member of the alleged WhatsApp group and had no direct dealings with the complainant, and further taking into consideration that co-accused Ankit Modi, whose role, as per the prosecution case itself, appears to be more prominent inasmuch as he allegedly obtained and operated the bank account details connected with the transactions in question, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court in MCRC No. 1800/2026 vide order dated 13.04.2026. So far as the regarding the applicant’s involvement in two other criminal cases registered in the State of Haryana is concerned, it is not disputed that the applicant has already been granted bail in those matters. Further the charge- sheet has been filed in the present case, he is jail since 24.06.2025, the conclusion of the trial will take some more time, therefore, 6 without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the applicant, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant – Rahul Kumar Jatav, involved in Crime No. 429/2025 registered at Police Station- City Kotwali, Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 409, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, 7 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 him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant 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 applicant is 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 him in accordance with law. 8. 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 Rahul Dewangan