1 CGHC010293782026 2026:CGHC:40543 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7313 of 2026 1 - Md. Rizwan S/o Md. Badre Alam Aged About 29 Years R/o Umari Takiya, P.S. Umari, District- Pratapgarh (U.P.) --- Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. New Rajendra Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Laxman Baghel, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, GA Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 17.09.2026 1) The applicant has 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. 128/2026 registered at Police Station, New Rajendra Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 318(4) of BNS and 66(D) of IT Act. 2) That, as per the prosecution case, it is alleged that between 10.03.2026 and 11.03.2026, the present applicant unauthorizedly accessed the mobile number of the complainant, Kamla Shadija, which was linked with her bank accounts. It is further alleged that, by gaining unauthorized access to said mobile number and using the same, the REKHA SINGH Digitally signed by REKHA SINGH DN: cn=REKHA SINGH, ou=HIGH COURT, o=HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN Date: 2026.09.17 16:18:57 +0530 2 applicant fraudulently carried out UPI transactions and transferred/withdrew a total amount of Rs.4,65,000/- from the complainant's bank account. Based on the aforesaid allegations of unauthorized access and fraudulent transfer/withdrawal of the amount through UPI, the offences have been registered against the present applicant. Hence, the bail application. 3) Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He would further submit that there are general allegations against the present applicant. He would contend that the present applicant is in jail since 30.05.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4) Per contra, learned State counsel would oppose the bail application and submit that the allegation against the present applicant is not merely based on a general or omnibus allegation. He would submit that the amount of Rs.4,65,000/- defrauded from the account of the complainant was transferred to the bank account of the present applicant through UPI transactions. He would further submit that the aforesaid transaction establishes a direct link between the present applicant and the amount alleged to have been fraudulently withdrawn from the complainant's account. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to grant of bail. 5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6) Having considered the fact that the amount defrauded from the account of the complainant, to the tune of Rs4,65,000/-, was transferred to the bank account of the present applicant, the manner in which the offence 3 was committed, and the nature of the allegations against the present applicant, I am not inclined to grant bail to the present applicant. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 is rejected. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Rekha