1 CGHC010282962026 2026:CGHC:36843 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6612 of 2026 Shubham Nagwani S/o Vinod Nagwani, Aged About 30 Years R/o Behind Buddh Vihar Gautam Nagar, Lakhe Nagar P. S. Purani Basti, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) ...Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through, Station House Officer Telibandha, Raipur Distt. Raipur (C.G.) …Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Wasim Miyan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 18.08.2026 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 609/2025, registered at Police Station : Telibandha, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 & 3(5) of the BNS. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that pursuant to instructions received from the senior office, information regarding mule bank accounts VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.08.19 17:33:30 +0530 2 allegedly used for receiving, disbursing, utilizing and concealing the proceeds of cyber fraud was obtained from the Coordination Portal of the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C), Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. During scrutiny of the said information, it was found that a total of 51 bank accounts maintained with UCO Bank, Raipur Branches, had received an aggregate amount of Rs.21,29,355/- from cyber-fraud transactions reported on the Cyber Crime Portal during the period from 01.01.2024 to 30.06.2025. It was alleged that the account holders, correspondents, mobile-number holders and other persons had facilitated the receipt and utilization of the said fraudulently obtained money and had thereby knowingly participated in activities relating to cyber fraud and accumulation of illegal wealth. During further investigation conducted by the Range Cyber Police Station, Raipur, the account holders, namely Govind Yadav and Neha Nagwani, were summoned, questioned and their statements were recorded, and notices under Section 94 of the BNS were issued. The prosecution further alleged that the accused persons had acted in concert and facilitated the opening and operation of bank accounts for receiving proceeds of cyber fraud and, thereafter, knowingly retained, concealed, utilized or dealt with such illegal proceeds. On the basis of the investigation, Crime No. 609/2025 was registered at Police Station Telibandha, District Raipur, for offences punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5) and 111 read with Section 3(5) of the BNS. The accused was arrested and, after completion of investigation, the final report/charge-sheet was submitted before the competent Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is 3 innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and that the prosecution has failed to establish any prima facie case against him, his arrest being based merely on presumption. The applicant has been in custody since 21.12.2025 and has already undergone about seven months of pre-trial detention; the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. It is further submitted that there is no direct evidence on record connecting the applicant with the alleged offence and no incriminating article has been seized from his possession. The allegation against the applicant is that he provided the bank account of his mother, namely Neha Nagwani, to the main accused, Manish Krishnani; however, the notice issued to the applicant's mother under Section 94 of the BNSS specifically reflects that only an amount of Rs.20,000/- relating to the alleged fraud was credited into the said account on 30.10.2024, which does not, by itself, establish the applicant's involvement in the alleged offence. The applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence, and therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the period of custody already undergone, completion of investigation and filing of the charge-sheet, the applicant deserves to be released on regular bail. 4. Learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed. It is further submitted that, in compliance with the order dated 27.07.2026, the Investigating Officer has brought on record that, during investigation, a financial transaction of Rs.20,000/- dated 03.10.2024 was found in UCO Bank Account No. 35080210000960, IFSC UCBA0003508, standing in the name of 4 Neha Nagwani, mother of the present applicant, and that an online complaint of cyber fraud in relation to the said transaction had been lodged through the Cyber Crime Portal/1930 of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, bearing Acknowledgement No. 33210240029265. It is further submitted that three different reports originating from different places/states were found linked with the aforesaid bank account on the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Portal, thereby connecting the account with multiple reported cyber- fraud transactions. During investigation, the account holder Neha Nagwani was examined, and she stated that although the account, along with the ATM card, passbook, cheque book and other banking instruments, stood in her name, the same was being operated and maintained by her son, the present applicant Shubham Nagwani. She further disclosed that the applicant had admitted to her that he had sold the said bank account to his partner/co-accused Manish Krishnani for consideration of Rs.10,000/-, and that the relevant banking documents and instruments were being maintained by Manish Krishnani. It is submitted that, during investigation, a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS was issued to the applicant requiring him to appear and explain his role in the operation of the said bank account, and a notice under Section 94 of the BNSS was also issued for production of the relevant documents/material relating to the alleged purchase, sale and operation of the account; however, the applicant failed to produce any document or material satisfactorily explaining the said transaction or his role in the operation of the account. It is further submitted that the investigation has revealed that the aforesaid account, standing in the name of the applicant's mother, 5 was connected with reported cyber-fraud transactions and that, from the date of opening of the account, an aggregate amount of Rs.37,86,687.01/- was credited therein, out of which Rs.37,08,703/- was debited/withdrawn. Learned State Counsel, therefore, submits that the material collected during investigation prima facie indicates the involvement of the present applicant in facilitating and operating the bank account used in connection with cyber-fraud transactions and, considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the applicant is not entitled to the benefit of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the submissions of learned State Counsel, the material collected during investigation and the nature of allegations, this Court finds that the bank account standing in the name of the applicant's mother was allegedly connected with multiple cyber-fraud transactions and that substantial amounts were credited to and withdrawn from the said account. The statement of the account holder, Neha Nagwani, prima facie attributes the operation and maintenance of the account to the present applicant and further indicates that the applicant had allegedly handed over/sold the said account to co-accused Manish Krishnani for consideration. The applicant has also failed to furnish any satisfactory material or document in response to the notices issued during investigation to explain his alleged role in the operation and handling of the account. Thus, at this stage, the material available on record cannot be said to be wholly insufficient to establish the applicant's prima facie involvement in the alleged offence. It is also 6 relevant that the bail applications of the co-accused persons have already been rejected by this Court. Having regard to the nature and gravity of the allegations, the material collected during investigation, the alleged use of the bank account in multiple cyber-fraud transactions and the substantial amount of money transacted through the account, this Court is not inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the present applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is liable to be and is hereby rejected. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Shubham Nagwani involved in Crime No. 609/2025, registered at Police Station : Telibandha, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 & 3(5) of the BNS, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. 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 vaibhav