1 CGHC010248042026 2026:CGHC:31551 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5943 of 2026 1 - Rupendra Singh S/o Sampat Singh Aged About 21 Years Resident Of Poti, Churu, District- Binasar Rajasthan 2 - Vishal Singh S/o Jeev Raj Singh Aged About 21 Years Resident Of Poti, Churu, District- Binasar Rajasthan ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The P.S. Cyber Cell Bilaspur Range, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 23.07.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 02/2026 registered at Police Station - Cyber Cell Bilaspur Range, District - Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.24 10:55:38 +0530 2 308(6), 318(4) of the BNS and Sections 66C and 66D of the I.T. (Amendment), Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 28.04.2026, the complainant, Prashant Shrivastava, Director of HR Consultancy Private Limited, lodged a written complaint before the Cyber Cell, Bilaspur Range, alleging that his mother was subjected to a "digital arrest" by unknown persons through a video and voice call received from WhatsApp number 7359915975 for approximately 2 hours and 30 minutes. During the said conversation, the callers falsely represented that she was involved in funding banned terrorist organisations and threatened her with legal action, including arrest by agencies such as the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and other authorities, if she failed to comply with their directions or disclosed the conversation to anyone. The accused persons further induced fear by sending forged documents purportedly issued by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and other authorities. Under such fear and intimidation, the complainant's mother transferred substantial amounts to various bank accounts as directed by the fraudsters. During the course of investigation, the Cyber Cell traced the transactions, collected the relevant electronic and documentary evidence, arrested the present applicants in connection with the offence, and after completion of the investigation, filed the charge- sheet before the competent Trial Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the applicants are the sole breadwinners of their respective families and their continued incarceration is causing severe 3 financial hardship to their dependents. It is further submitted that the applicants had neither any motive nor any intention to commit the alleged offence and have never contacted, threatened, or induced the complainant or any other person. According to the prosecution itself, no call or communication was made from the mobile number of the applicants to the complainant, which clearly shows that the applicants had no role in the alleged "digital arrest" or in inducing the complainant's mother to transfer money. Learned counsel further submits that the applicants had no knowledge of the alleged amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- deposited in the concerned bank account and were arrested on 08.05.2026 merely on the basis of bank transactions without any proper verification or investigation regarding the correctness of the entries. It is also submitted that no prima facie material is available to establish the applicants' involvement in the commission of the alleged offence. The applicants have been in judicial custody since 08.05.2026, the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, and there is no likelihood of the applicants absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence if released on bail. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicants be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court after completion of the investigation. It is submitted that the present case pertains to a well-organized cyber fraud involving the modus operandi of a "digital arrest", whereby the complainant's mother was put under fear by impersonating officials of investigating agencies and was induced to transfer a huge amount of money into different bank accounts. During the course of investigation, sufficient 4 incriminating material, including electronic evidence, bank account details, transaction records, mobile data, and the memorandum statements of the accused persons, has been collected, which prima facie establishes the involvement of the present applicants in the commission of the offence. Learned State counsel further submits that the investigation has revealed that the applicants were beneficiaries of the defrauded amount and knowingly permitted their bank accounts to be used for routing the proceeds of crime in lieu of commission. It is also submitted that the money trail traced during investigation clearly connects the applicants with the alleged offence and their role cannot be said to be merely incidental. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the magnitude of the cyber fraud involving a cheated amount of Rs. 1,04,80,000/-, the manner in which the offence was committed, and the prima facie material collected during investigation, learned State counsel submits that the applicants do not deserve the discretionary relief of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the case diary, the charge-sheet and the material available on record, this Court finds that the prosecution case pertains to a serious cyber fraud committed by adopting the modus operandi of a "digital arrest", wherein the complainant's mother was allegedly induced, under fear and intimidation, to transfer an amount of Rs. 1,04,80,000/- into different bank accounts. During the course of investigation, the bank account of applicant No. 1 was found to have been used for receiving a 5 part of the defrauded amount. The case diary further reveals that, on the basis of the memorandum statement of applicant No. 1, his bank passbook, cheque book and PAN card were seized. The investigation also discloses that an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- was credited into the bank account of applicant No. 1 and, after withdrawal of the said amount, he allegedly received Rs. 20,000/- as commission for permitting the use of his bank account. The electronic evidence, bank transaction details and other material collected during investigation prima facie establish the active involvement of applicant No. 1 in the alleged offence. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the magnitude of the alleged cyber fraud involving Rs. 1,04,80,000/-, the specific role attributed to applicant No. 1, and the prima facie material available against him, this Court is of the considered opinion that no case for grant of regular bail is made out. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the bail application preferred by applicant No. 1 deserves to be and is hereby rejected. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant No. 1 - Rupendra Singh, involved in Crime No. 02/2026 registered at Police Station - Cyber Cell Bilaspur Range, District - Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 308(6), 318(4) of the BNS and Sections 66C and 66D of the I.T. (Amendment), Act, is rejected. 8. So far as applicant No. 2, Vishal Singh, is concerned, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, and the material available in the case diary, it is observed that no recovery has been made from his possession and his alleged involvement is primarily based on the memorandum statement recorded during the 6 course of investigation. The charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, his custodial interrogation is no longer required, he has no criminal antecedents, and he has been in judicial custody since 08.05.2026, considering that the trial is likely to take some time to conclude, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to applicant No. 2. Vishal Singh. 9. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant No. 2 - Vishal Singh, involved in involved in Crime No. 02/2026 registered at Police Station - Cyber Cell Bilaspur Range, District - Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 308(6), 318(4) of the BNS and Sections 66C and 66D of the I.T. (Amendment), Act, be released on bail on him furnishing a 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, 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, 7 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. 10. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance within one week from today. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav