1 CGHC010188982026 2026:CGHC:30976 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4435 of 2026 Mohammad Soyal S/o Mohammad Islamuddin Aged About 30 Years R/o Islamia Road Bakra Mandi Ward No 30, Sardar City Distt- Churu Rajastan ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer Police Station - Bhatapara (Gramin) District- Baloda-Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Arpit Parakh, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Govt. Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 21.07.2026 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 309/2025 registered at Police Station : Bhatapara(Gramin), District – Baloda-Bazar - Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. 2. As per the prosecution story, the complainant, namely Pramod Kumar Gupta, lodged a report at Police Station Bhatapara (Gramin), stating that on 09.07.2024, he received a link on his mobile phone purportedly from ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.07.22 16:49:28 +0530 2 HDFC Securities. Upon opening the link, he was induced to invest in IPOs with the assurance of earning substantial profits, and he was automatically added to the said investment platform. After some time, the complainant realized that he had been cheated by unknown persons through a cyber fraud. It is alleged that he was defrauded of a sum of Rs. 8,94,110/- in the name of investment in IPOs. On the basis of the complaint, the police conducted an investigation and registered the present FIR against unknown persons for the offences punishable under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000. During the course of the investigation, the present applicant was implicated in the alleged offence. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the entire case of the prosecution against the present applicant is false, baseless, and fabricated, as it is founded on incorrect and unfounded allegations. He further submits that the name of the present applicant does not find mention in the First Information Report and no seizure has been made from the possession of the present applicant. He also submits that the complainant has neither made any allegation against the present applicant nor mentioned his name in the written complaint. He submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and the applicant has been in jail since 14.02.2026, 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 opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that, in the present case, the charge- sheet has not yet been submitted before the competent Court. He further submits that, in compliance with this Court's order dated 12.05.2026, the Investigating Officer has filed a personal affidavit stating that, during the 3 course of the investigation of Crime No. 309/2025, documentary evidence was collected, including the complainant's bank statement from the concerned bank for the period from 01.08.2024 to 12.05.2025. Upon scrutiny of the said bank statement, it was revealed that the complainant had been subjected to cyber fraud and that an amount of Rs. 8,94,110/- had been fraudulently transferred through various bank accounts. Out of the said amount, a sum of Rs. 2,40,000/- was credited to Bank Account No. 924010037082622, allegedly belonging to the present accused, Mohammad Soyal. The remaining amount was transferred through Bank Account No. 00750210003053 belonging to the co-accused and Bank Account No. 25170210002599 maintained in the name of Sokat Enterprises/JSTAR Enterprises. It is further submitted that, on the basis of the aforesaid documentary evidence, the present applicant/accused was arrested, and his memorandum statement was recorded on 13.02.2026 in the presence of independent witnesses. In his memorandum statement, the accused disclosed that he had come into contact with one Samir, who offered him money in exchange for the use of his bank account. He further stated that, during the months of July/August 2024, Samir, along with his associates, namely, Aditya Meghwal, Arbaz Khan, and Sonu Meghwal, took him to Fauzi Hotel, where they informed him that an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- would be deposited into his bank account and that he would receive a commission of Rs. 2,000/- for permitting the use of the account. It is further alleged that, being lured by the said offer, the accused handed over his bank passbook, a blank signed cheque, and his ATM card to Samir. After about 10 to 15 days, Samir informed him that money would be deposited into his account through a gaming application. Thereafter, Samir and his associates allegedly took the accused to the Canara Bank branch 4 situated at Rajwale Kuye, where they withdrew a total amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- from his account on two occasions. Subsequently, they persuaded him to open another bank account with Axis Bank, bearing Account No. 924010037082622, and got his mobile number, 7737606374, linked to the said account. Thereafter, Samir took control of the said bank account and allegedly used it to receive online transfers and withdraw amounts from it. The accused further stated that one Sonu had transferred an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- through PhonePe. Therefore, considering the nature and gravity of the offence, learned State counsel submits that the applicant 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, the nature and gravity of the offence, and further the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, coupled with the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and the applicant has been in judicial custody since 29.03.2026, and as the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail. 7. Let applicant, Mohammad Soyal, involved in Crime No. 309/2025 registered at Police Station : Bhatapara(Gramin), District – Baloda-Bazar - Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- 5 (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, 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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek