Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 31939 (CHH)

KAWALJEET SINGH VIG v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/7202/2026 · 2026-08-05

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010300172026 2026:CGHC:34504 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7202 of 2026 Kawaljeet Singh Vig S/o Late Praduman Singh Vig Aged About 38 Years R/o - Sindhi Ward No. 15, Dongar 35, Police Station Parasia, District - Chhindwara, Madhya Pradesh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Cyber Range Raipur, District – Raipur, Chhattisgarh. …. Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Gajendra Prakash Sahu, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 06.08.2026 1. This is the Second Bail Application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant arrested in connection with Crime No. 05/2026 registered at Police Station – Cyber Police Station, Range Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420/34 of the BNS. 2. Earlier the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 20.04.2026 passed in MCRC No.2111/2026, on merits. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on a written complaint made by the complainant regarding online unauthorized financial transaction, an FIR was lodged by the Cyber Police Station Range Raipur (C.G.) on 10.07.2024 against an unknown persons for RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 offence under Section 420/34 of the IPC and while investigation of the said incident, the amount of Rs. 50,000/- has been recovered from ICICI Bank account bearing No. 328505000137 of the accused, therefore, he was arrested for the said offence. Hence, this application. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is in jail since 19.12.2025, and out of 8 prosecution witnesses till date only one prosecution witness has been examined by the trial Court, and the conclusion of the trial shall take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel, opposes the bail application and submits that the offence alleged pertains to cheating through online unauthorized financial transactions, which is a serious economic offence having wider ramifications on society, and further the amount of Rs. 50,000/- has also been recovered from ICICI Bank account bearing No. 328505000137 of the accused/applicant. As such, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the ground made by the the applicant that till date out of 08 prosecution witnesses only one witness has been examined by the trial Court, out of which the injured witness has turned hostile, 3 the same cannot be a ground for releasing the applicant on bail as the same amounts to only tampering with the evidence. 8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, it is transpires that the offence alleged pertains to cheating through online unauthorized financial transactions, which is a serious economic offence having wider ramifications on society, and further the amount of Rs. 50,000/- has also been recovered from ICICI Bank account bearing No. 328505000137 of the accused/applicant, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicants on regular bail. 9. Accordingly, this second bail application of applicant – Kawaljeet Singh Vig, involved in Crime No. 05/2026 registered at Police Station – Cyber Police Station, Range Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420/34 of the BNS, is rejected at this stage. 10. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months from the date of passing of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 11. Let a certified copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar