1 CGHC010353392026 2026:CGHC:40443 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8620 of 2026 Gourav Rout S/o Gagan Bihari Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Jaysingada, P.O. Bandhadiha, District Jajpur, Odisha ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kondagaon, District – Kondagaon (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. B.P. Singh, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sourabh K. Pande, Dy. Advocate General. Hon'ble Mr. Rakesh Mohan Pandey, Judge Order on Board 16.09.2026 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. 322/2025 registered at Police Station – Kondagaon, District – Kondagaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 318(4), 111(2), 111(2)(b) and 3(5) of the BNS and Section 66D of the IT Act. 2. Earlier the first bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits vide order dated 11.03.2026 passed in MCRC No.1968/2026. 3. As per the prosecution’s story, a correspondence Dated 04/04/2025 was received from the Cyber Cell Office of the SP, Kondagaon, CG addressed to Sub Inspector Gulab Tondon, of P.S. Kondagaon, CG stating that a complaint has been lodged on the Cyber Portal against one Lokeshwar Hirwani and Kamleshwar Nag, account RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 holders of Account No 5660383552 of Central Bank of India. Upon reviewing the Bank Transactions, it was found that a huge amount of 72,09,424/- has been transacted during the period from 01/01/2024 to 08/03/2025. On the Basis of the said information, P.S. Kondagaon, CG registered FIR no. 322/2025 for the Offences Punishable under Section 317(2), 317(5) and 3(5) of the BNS against Lokeshwar Hirwani and Kamleshwar Nag. During investigation, the Police recorded the statement of witnesses and memorandum statement of the accused persons, wherein name of present applicant surfaced. Hence, this application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. He submits that the co- accused person has already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 02.09.2026 passed in MCRC No.7330/2026. So far as the status of the trial is concerned, out of 14 witnesses, only 01 witness has been examined and the applicant is in jail since 10.11.2025, and the conclusion of the trial would take some time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 5. Learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits vide order dated 11.03.2026 passed in MCRC No.1968/2026, and subsequently thereafter, an SLP was preferred by the applicant before the Hon’ble Supreme Court being Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No. 48758/2026, and same was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 24.08.2026. It is further submitted that the material collected during investigation clearly 3 reveals a deep-rooted, structured and profit-oriented criminal conspiracy in which the present applicant has played an indispensable and conscious role in facilitating the commission of large-scale cyber frauds affecting numerous innocent citizens across the country, therefore, this bail application deserves to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits vide order dated 11.03.2026 passed in MCRC No.1968/2026, and subsequently thereafter, an SLP preferred by the applicant before the Hon’ble Supreme Court being Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No. 48758/2026, same was dismissed as withdrawn on 24.08.2026, moreover, there are serious allegations levelled against the applicant regarding the commitment of cyber fraud, as discussed in earlier order dated 11.03.2026. Further there are direct evidence to show that the applicant was involved in the crime relating to facilitating fraudulent transactions of amounts in multiple bank accounts for wrongful gaining. Though the co-accused person has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 02.09.2026 passed in MCRC No.7330/2026, but the allegations made against the said co- accused are distinguishable from the allegations made against the present applicant. Therefore, having regard to the gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant at this stage. Accordingly, the instant second bail application is hereby rejected. 4 8. Let a certified copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rajshekhar