1 CGHC010226042026 2026:CGHC:32677 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.Cr.C No.5635 of 2026 Rajesh Kumar Lahre @ Karan Lahre S/o Vikram Lahre Aged About 22 Years R/o Sanjay Nagar, Talapara, P.S. Civil Line District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Details Incompletely Mentioned In Impugned Order And Applicants Title Lahre In Wrongly Mentioned As Lahare) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer (S.H.O.) P.S. Cyber Range (Civil Line), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant _____________________________________________________ For Applicant :Mr. Devershi Thakur, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State :Mr. SS Baghel, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 29.07.2026 1. The Applicant has preferred this 1st Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.07.30 11:14:18 +0530 2 connection with Crime No.13/2025 registered at Police Station Cyber Range (Civil Line), District Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offences under Sections 61(2), 317(5), 318(4), 323 and 111(4) of BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that during an investigation into mule bank accounts conducted by the Range Cyber Police Station, Bilaspur through the Government of India's Samanvaya Portal, it was found that an amount of Rs.5,88,718/-, including a transaction of Rs.3,999/- reported by the complainant, had been transferred to the bank account of the present Applicant. The prosecution alleges that the Applicant, in conspiracy with the co-accused, permitted his bank account to be used as a mule account for routing proceeds of cyber fraud obtained by deceiving victims on the pretext of online mobile purchases and other false inducements. During investigation, the Applicant allegedly disclosed that he had allowed his bank account to be used at the instance of a co-accused for receiving the cheated amount, in lieu of commission and thereafter withdrew and distributed the money among the other accused persons. Upon completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet has been filed against the Applicant for the offences as mentioned above. Hence this application. 3 3. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that neither the FIR nor the complaint contains any allegation that the Applicant ever contacted or induced any victim to transfer money and no victim has identified him as the person who perpetrated the alleged fraud. It is further submitted that the principal allegation is against the persons who operated the cyber fraud, whereas the Applicant is only alleged to have permitted the use of his bank account by a co-accused and to have received a nominal commission. It is also submitted that co-accused, Nitish Bhardwaj, in whose bank account the principal amount of the alleged fraudulent proceeds was allegedly credited, had earlier been denied regular bail by this Court vide order dated 10.12.2025 passed in M.Cr.C. No.8909 of 2025, however, he has subsequently been granted regular bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 07.05.2026 passed in SLP (Crl.) No.249 of 2026. He further submits that PW-1 has already been examined and his cross-examination discloses several procedural irregularities in the investigation, including the absence of independent witnesses to the memorandum, seizure and arrest proceedings. It is further submitted that another co-accused Deepak Vishwakarma, 4 has also been arrested in connection with the present case, the Applicant has been in judicial custody since 05.07.2025, the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has been filed, only eight prosecution witnesses have been cited, out of whom one has already been examined and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, therefore, he may be granted regular bail. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the application and submits that there is sufficient material available in the case diary to prima facie establish the involvement of the Applicant in the alleged offence. Inviting the attention to paragraphs 6 to 12 of the affidavit filed by the Investigating Officer, it is submitted that during the course of investigation, on the basis of bank records, the Cyber Police Portal, the Coordination Portal and other electronic evidence, the involvement of the Applicant came to light. It is contended that the co-accused, in his memorandum statement, specifically disclosed that the Applicant, along with the other accused persons, was involved in arranging mule bank accounts for routing the proceeds of cyber fraud and sharing the commission received therefrom. It is further submitted that the Applicant, in his memorandum statement, admitted that he had facilitated opening of multiple bank accounts at 5 the instance of co-accused Shahil @ Altaf, handed over the passbooks, ATM cards and linked mobile numbers for use in cyber fraud and received commission for the same. It is lastly submitted that the mobile phones allegedly used in commission of the offence have also been seized from his possession, therefore, considering the active role attributed to the Applicant in the alleged conspiracy, he is 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 the principal allegation against the Applicant is that he had permitted the use of his bank account and received commission therefor, the fact that the principal accused Nitish Bhardwaj, has already been enlarged on regular bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 07.05.2026 passed in SLP (Crl.) No.249 of 2026, the fact that another co-accused has also been arrested, the period of custody of the Applicant since 05.07.2025, the fact that one prosecution witness has already been examined out of the eight witnesses cited by the prosecution and 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 it is a fit case to allow 6 the application. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 6. Let Applicant-Rajesh Kumar Lahre @ Karan Lahre involved in Crime No.13/2025 registered at Police Station Cyber Range (Civil Line), District Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offences under Sections 61(2), 317(5), 318(4), 323 and 111(4) of BNS be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties 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 7 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. 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