1 CGHC010314832026 2026:CGHC:38328 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7873 of 2026 Daitari Deep S/o Shri Damjee Deep Aged About 33 Years R/o Chota Ashok Nagar, In Front Of Chain Kirana Store, Ram Krishna Paramhans Ward No. 02 Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - S.H.O. P.S. Azad Chowk, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Karan Kumar Baharani, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 31.08.2026 1. This is the Second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 283/2025 registered at Police Station : Azad Chowk, District- Raipur, C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 10.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 4502/2026. PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.09.01 16:17:57 +0530 2 3. As per the case of the prosecution, in brief, the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, has established the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal for reporting cyber frauds committed across the country. During scrutiny of the information received through the said portal, it came to the notice of the Cyber Range, Raipur, that 17 bank accounts opened with South Indian Bank, Ramsagar Para Branch, Raipur, were allegedly being used for receiving the proceeds of cyber fraud. On the basis of the information received from Police Headquarters, Raipur, Crime No. 283/2025 was registered against the account holders for the offences punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5) of the BNS, and investigation was commenced. During the course of investigation, it was found that a sum of Rs.2,11,10,263/- obtained through cyber fraud had been credited into the bank account of co-accused Santosh Kumar, bearing Account No. 0433053000007320, maintained with South Indian Bank. It is further alleged that, on the basis of the memorandum statement of co-accused Karan Singh, the involvement of the present applicant surfaced, whereupon he was arrested. The investigation further revealed that the present applicant, in connivance with the other co-accused persons, had facilitated the opening and use of as many as 17 bank accounts for receiving the proceeds of cyber fraud. It is also alleged that the bank account of co-accused Santosh Kumar had been sold to him by the present applicant and that the said account was used for routing cyber fraud proceeds amounting to Rs.2,11,10,263/-. It is further alleged that co- accused Karan Singh had also sold his bank account to the present applicant, into which an amount of Rs.46,61,115/- obtained through cyber fraud was credited. After completion of the investigation, a supplementary charge-sheet has been filed against the present applicant before the 3 competent Court. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the first bail application which was rejected by this Court vide order dated 10.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 4502/2026 on merits. He also submits that the co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 26.02.2026, 16.06.2026, 10.07.2026 passed in MCRC Nos. 613/2026, 1275/2026, 1086/2026, 3184/2026, 4000/2026 and 5104/2026, further the applicant is in jail since 21.12.2025 and the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, therefore, the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays that the applicant to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits on the ground that there is sufficient material available on record to prima-facie establish the involvement of the present applicant in the alleged offence. He further submits that during the course of investigation, it was revealed that as many as 17 bank accounts were opened and utilized for receiving the proceeds of cyber fraud and the complicity of the present applicant surfaced during investigation. It is further submitted that the supplementary charge-sheet has already been filed against the applicant. He also submits that although co-accused Narayan Kosariya and Gopi Verma have been granted bail by this Court but the case of the present applicant stands on a different footing, as his role is distinct and supported by the material collected during investigation. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence involving large-scale cyber fraud and the specific role attributed to the applicant, he prays for rejection of the bail application. 4 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. On a pointed query being made by this Court with regard to the present status of the trial, learned counsel for the applicant submits that no order- sheets of the trial Court have been annexed along with the present bail application to indicate the present stage of the trial. 8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court order dated 10.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 4502/2026 on the ground that the specific role attributed to the present applicant, as emerging from the investigation and the affidavit of the Investigating Officer, is qualitatively different and distinguishes his case from that of the aforesaid co-accused who have been granted bail by this Court, so far as the status of the trial is concerned, learned counsel for the applicant submits that no order-sheets of the trial Court have been annexed along with the present bail application to indicate the present stage of the trial, in view of the nature of the allegations, the applicant's prima-facie involvement, the reasons recorded while rejecting the earlier bail application, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case for grant of regular bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application deserves to be and is hereby rejected. 9. Accordingly, the second bail application of applicant – Daitari Deep involved in Crime No. 283/2025 registered at Police Station : Azad Chowk, District- Raipur, C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023., rejected at this stage. 10. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 5 11. The Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti