1 CGHC010209352026 2026:CGHC:29714 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5406 of 2026 1 - Gopal Nirmalkar S/o Late Tekram Nirmalkar Aged About 25 Years R/o Indira Nagar, Near Sheetla Mandir, Ward No. 5, Supela, District - Durg (C.G.) --- Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station - Vaishali Nagar, District - Durg (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) With MCRC No. 5689 of 2026 1 - Smt. Uma Sharma W/o Sanjeev Sharma Aged About 43 Years R/o H I G 03, Quarter No. 2/99, Housing Board Bhilai, Industries Area, Police Station Jamul, Tehsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh ---Applicant(s) Versus RUCHI YADAV Digitally signed by RUCHI YADAV 2 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Vaishali Nagar, District Durg Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Tarun Dansena, Advocate in MCRC No. 5406 of 2026 Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate in MCRC No. 5689 of 2026 For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. S. S. Baghel, G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 14/07/2026 1. Since the aforesaid bail applications arise out of the same crime number, they are being heard and decided by this common order. 2. The present are the first bail applications filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, "BNSS"), seeking grant of regular bail to the applicants, who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 86/2025 registered at Police Station- Vaishali Nagar, District- Durg (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318 (4), 61(2) (A) and 3(5) of BNS. 3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the Branch Manager of Canara Bank lodged a report alleging that, upon scrutiny of certain bank accounts, he noticed 111 suspected mule accounts in which transactions were suspected to be connected 3 with online gaming and fraudulent financial activities. Acting upon the said report, the police registered the present crime and commenced investigation. During the course of investigation, it was found that an amount of ₹22,05,173.53 had been kept on hold in the suspected accounts and that frequent transactions had taken place therein. It is further alleged that, during investigation, it came to light that the present applicants and the co-accused persons had purchased bank accounts for use in online gaming-related transactions. The applicants are alleged to have been implicated on the basis of material collected during investigation and were subsequently arrested. 4. In MCRC No. 5406 of 2026, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that there is no material on record to establish the applicant's involvement in the alleged offence and that he has been implicated solely on the basis of his memorandum statement. It is further submitted that no material has been collected during the investigation to show that the applicant was involved in the alleged fraudulent transactions or had any knowledge of the source of the money credited to the bank account in question. Learned counsel further submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicant has no criminal antecedents, and is in judicial custody since 02.06.2025. It is also submitted that similarly situated co- accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by this 4 Court. The conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. On these grounds, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 5. In MCRC No.5689 of 2026, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant is a lady, has no criminal antecedents and is in judicial custody since 22.04.2025. Learned counsel submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed and only a few prosecution witnesses have been examined, therefore, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. It is also submitted that similarly situated co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by this Court on the ground of parity. On these grounds, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 6. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that, although the charge-sheet has already been filed, an affidavit of the Investigating Officer has also been filed, which prima facie discloses the involvement of the applicant in the alleged offence. It is submitted that, during the course of investigation, the bank account of co-accused Uma Sharma was found to have received transactions amounting to approximately ₹5 crores within a short span of time. It is further submitted that the bank account of the present applicant, Gopal Nirmalkar, was also found to have been used for routing the alleged proceeds of online cyber fraud, wherein an amount of ₹55,91,374.55 was 5 allegedly credited and ₹55,78,408.92 was allegedly withdrawn. It is also submitted that the present case involves a racket comprising 13 accused persons engaged in large-scale online cyber fraud. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations and the material collected during the course of investigation, it is prayed that the bail application be rejected. 7. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the affidavit filed by the Investigating Officer and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds that the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has already been filed. The applicants, namely, Gopal Nirmalkar (applicant in MCRC No. 5406 of 2026) and Uma Sharma (applicant in MCRC No. 5689 of 2026), have remained in judicial custody since 02.06.2025 and 22.04.2025, respectively. It is also not in dispute that both the applicants have no criminal antecedents. So far as the applicant Gopal Nirmalkar is concerned, the prosecution alleges that his bank account was used for routing the proceeds of the alleged cyber fraud, whereas the applicant Uma Sharma is sought to be implicated on the basis of the transactions reflected in her bank account. However, the evidence in support of the said allegations is a matter to be appreciated during trial. Considering that the investigation has concluded, the charge-sheet has been filed, similarly situated co-accused persons have already been 6 enlarged on bail by this Court, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the considered opinion that further custodial detention of the applicants is not warranted. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, both the bail applications deserve to be and are hereby allowed. 9. Let the applicants, namely Gopal Nirmalkar and Smt. Uma Sharma, involved in Crime No. 86/2025 registered at Police Station- Vaishali Nagar, District- Durg (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318 (4), 61(2)(A) and 3(5) of BNS, be released on bail on their furnishing personal bonds with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, subject to the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed 7 against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants 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 them in accordance with law. 10. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously from the receipt of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 8 11. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Ruchi