1 CGHC010227972026 2026:CGHC:32678 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.Cr.C No.5609 of 2026 Mohammad Sammi Ashrafi Son Of Samsuddin, Aged About 56 Years Resident Of Maudhapara, Afroj Bag, P.S. Maudhapara,raipur Tahsil And Raipur Chhattisgarh --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Tikrapara Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) --- Non-applicant M.Cr.C No.6476 of 2026 Chandrakant Ramteke S/o Prahlad Ramteke Aged About 44 Years R/o House No.8/587, A, Chhota Ashok Nagar, Gongaon Road, Gudiyari, P.S. Gudiyari, Tahsil And District Raipur (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Tikarapara, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.07.30 11:14:21 +0530 2 _____________________________________________________ For respective Applicants :Mr. CR Sashu and Ms. Lata Nayak, Advocates. For Non-applicant/State :Mr. SS Baghel, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 29.07.2026 1. The Applicants have preferred these 1st Bail Applications under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.229/2025 registered at Police Station Tikrapara, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offences under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5) and 111 of BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the present Applicants, along with the other co-accused persons, entered into a criminal conspiracy and dishonestly received and assisted in concealing the stolen amount pertaining to the alleged offence. During the course of investigation, it was found that Applicant-Mohammad Shammi Ashrafi, along with the other accused persons, had dishonestly received and assisted in concealing the stolen amount of Rs.21,97,673/-. It is further alleged that the role attributed to the other Applicant-Chandrakant Ramteke, is similar to that of the 3 other co-accused persons involved in the offence. Accordingly, both the Applicants were arrested and charge- sheeted for the aforesaid offences. Hence these applications. 3. Learned Counsel for the respective Applicants submit that the Applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case and have been in judicial custody since 26.03.2025 and 14.02.2026, respectively. It is further submitted that co-accused Avinash Nishad has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 03.02.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No.1143/2026, co-accused Mohit Kumar Sahu, Tushar Bhasgouri and Gaurav Singh have also been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 20.01.2026 passed in their respective M.Cr.C. Nos.10044/2025, 76/2026 and 10047/2025. It is lastly submitted that the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, therefore, the present Applicants may also be granted regular bail on the ground of parity. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the applications and submits that there is sufficient material available in the case diary to prima facie establish the involvement of the Applicants in the alleged offence. Inviting the attention to paragraphs 9 to 13 of the affidavits filed by the respective 4 Investigating Officers pursuant to the orders dated 29.06.2026 and 20.07.2026, it is submitted that during the course of investigation, it was found that the bank accounts of the Applicants were being used for routing the proceeds of online cyber fraud. It is submitted that in the case of Applicant Mohammad Sammi Ashrafi, five cyber fraud complaints were found to be linked with his bank account and an amount of Rs.91,98,155/- was credited therein within a short span of time, whereas in the case of Applicant Chandrakant Ramteke, as many as 29 cyber fraud complaints involving an amount of Rs.7,32,786/- were found to be linked with his bank account and an amount of Rs.64,98,641/- was credited therein. It is further submitted that in their respective memorandum statements, both the Applicants admitted that they had opened bank accounts at the instance of co-accused Mohammad Irfan and other co- accused persons, handed over the bank account kits, passbooks and ATM cards in consideration of monetary benefits and thereby facilitated the commission of cyber fraud. It is further submitted that Applicant Chandrakant Ramteke also admitted to having sold several bank accounts to different co-accused persons for a total consideration of Rs.1,50,000/-, therefore, considering the active role 5 attributed to the Applicants in the alleged conspiracy, they are not entitled to the benefit of bail. 5. Considering the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the parties, the material available in the case diary, the nature of allegations, the fact that co-accused Avinash Nishad has already been enlarged on regular bail by this Court vide order dated 03.02.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No.1143/2026 and co-accused Mohit Kumar Sahu, Tushar Bhasgouri and Gaurav Singh have also been granted regular bail by this Court vide common order dated 20.01.2026 passed in their respective M.Cr.C. Nos.10044/2025, 76/2026 and 10047/2025, the period of custody of the Applicants since 26.03.2025 and 14.02.2026, respectively and considering that the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, without further commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that these are fit cases to allow the applications. Accordingly, the bail applications are allowed. 6. Let Applicants-Mohammad Sammi Ashrafi and Chandrakant Ramteke involved in Crime No.229/2025 registered at Police Station Tikrapara, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offences under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5) and 111 of BNS be released on bail on their furnishing 6 a personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant/s shall file an undertaking to the effect that he/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 applicant/s shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his/their counsel. In case of his/their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him/them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant/s misuse/s the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his/their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant/s fail/s to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him/them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant/s 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/s 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/them in accordance with law. 7 7. 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 Priya