1 CGHC010257272026 2026:CGHC:31620 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6202 of 2026 1 - Surya Swarnakar S/o Ravishankar Swarnakar, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Jaisakarra Awaaspara, P/S Charama, District- Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through P/S Kanker, District- Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ... Non-applicant/Respondent (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Vinay Nagdev, Advocate. For State/Non-applicant : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Deputy Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 23-07-2026 1. The present regular bail application has been filed by the applicant under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short ‘BNSS’) who has been arrest on 19-04-2026 in connection with Crime No.135/2026 registered at Police Station Kanker, District Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318(4) and 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (in short ‘BNS’) and Section 8 of the Chhattisgarh Gambling (Prohibition) Act, 2022. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that, complainant Yashwant Singh Shyam, In-Charge, Cyber Cell Kanker lodged a report of 15-04- 2026 that the Cyber Cell Kanker received a complaint reference No.31310240058568 forwarded by the police headquarters, Raipur on Digitally signed by MOHAMMED AADIL KHAN Date: 2026.07.27 19:39:32 +0530 2 09-05-2025 regarding misuse of mule bank accounts for fraudulent transactions. On being investigation it was found that the co-accused accused Lokesh Tiwari along with bank employees Hitesh Nath Gosai, Manoj Kumar Sahu, present applicant Surya Swarnakar, Prakash Singh and Pulkit Chandrakar conspired together and induced one Tikesh Kumar Jain by offering monetary gain to open a bank account in his name and then he opened his bank account No.60487708012 at Bank of Maharashtra and bank account No.9449565736 at Kotak Mahindra Bank and linked his mobile number to these bank accounts. Thereafter, Lokesh Tiwari opened a bank account in his own name with Kenra Bank Kanker Branch having its account No.120000360192 and through these bank accounts made transaction of Rs.2,35,07,010/-. It is alleged that Lokesh Tiwari gave Rs.20,000/- to co-accused Hitesh Nath Gosai who transferred the same to co-accused Manoj Kumar Sahu who was an employee at Health Insurance Company and then co-accused Hitesh Nath Gosai and co-accused Manoj Kumar Sahu sent the bank account of Tikesh Kumar Jain and Lokesh Tiwari to the present applicant Surya Swarnkar through the passenger bus. The applicant Surya Swarnkar in turn sent the said bank accounts to other co- accused persons Prakash Singh and Pulkit Chandrakar and thus, considering their syndicate and commission of the alleged offence the FIR has been registered in which the present applicant has been arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence. He is running his courier business and in terms of his business he delivered the parcels sent by the persons to its destination. He is nowhere connected with the other co-accused persons against whom the 3 allegation of online gambling is leveled. He used to sent parcels to various persons through passenger bus and totally unaware about the alleged offence committed by the co-accused persons. There is no allegation against the present applicant that he is also involved in online gambling or in money transactions for the same. Even there is no bank account details or any electronic evidence like mobile call, chatting or messages present against the applicant. He would further submit that initially the applicant was a witness against the other accused persons and his statement under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. has also been recorded which clearly shows that under his business obligation he delivered the parcel to its consignee. However, subsequently he has also been added as the accused in the present case. There is no allegation that he involved in opening of the bank account in the name of other persons for money transaction. The applicant is in jail since 19-04-2026. The investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed, there is no criminal antecedent against the applicant and the final adjudication of the case will take its own time. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the ball application and has submitted that although there is no allegation against the applicant about active participation in online gambling or opening of the bank account, however, the allegation against the present applicant is that he transported the bank account of various persons to the accused persons to facilitate the money transaction in those bank accounts and thereby he is also a part of syndicate which the other accused persons have framed. Being syndicate of the alleged offence, he is also liable for the activities of online gambling. Looking to the network of their online gambling and the role attributed 4 to the present applicant regarding transporting of the bank accounts, he is not entitled for bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegation and further considering that there is no allegation against the present applicant regarding active involvement in online gambling or opening of bank account, further considering that the allegation against the applicant that he allegedly transported the bank accounts through passenger bus under obligation of courier service and also that initially he was a witness and his statement was also recorded by the police, he is in jail since 19-04-2026, charge sheet has been filed, there is possibility of delay in trial, there is no criminal antecedent against the applicant and the totality of the allegation against the present applicant, I am inclined to to release the present applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the application filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail is allowed. 8. It is directed that the applicant Surya Swarnakar shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, on following conditions that :- (i) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such fact to the Court, (ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and 5 (iii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial unless his personal presence is exempted by the trial Court. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Aadil