1 CGHC010319562026 2026:CGHC:41149 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7619 of 2026 Gautam Dewangan S/o Ramnarayan Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Birra, Police Station- Birra, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station- Nawagarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Kashish Saluja, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Rakesh Mohan Pandey, Judge Order on Board 22/09/2026 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 Nawagarh, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 318, 112(b) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that during the period from KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 2019 to 2024, the applicant, in association with co-accused Tikaram Shriwas and Rajeshwar Sahu, allegedly got an HDFC Bank account opened in his name and allowed the said account to be used as a mule account, wherein an amount of Rs.1,32,000/- was received in three instalments allegedly derived from cyber fraud. It is further alleged that the applicant had also received approximately Rs.11,16,399/- in his Axis Bank account during the period from 14.01.2024 to 01.01.2025, in connection with which Crime No.259/2025 registered at Police Station Shivrinarayan, is pending before the same Sessions Court. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the present offence was registered against the applicant and other accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He would submit that the applicant had handed over his HDFC Bank account to the main accused persons and the alleged transactions form part of the same transaction and modus operandi for which he has already remained in custody for about 10 months in Crime No.259/2025 and was enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in MCRC No.2218/2026 vide order dated 13.04.2026. He would further submit that the applicant had no knowledge of the transactions carried out through the said account and his role is limited to providing the bank account. He would also submit that the charge-sheet has already been filed, the investigation is complete, and the applicant has only one criminal antecedent in which he has already been granted bail. He further submits that the co-accused 3 Vansh Dewangan, whose bank accounts were also allegedly used in the same crime, has been granted anticipatory bail by a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in MCRCA No. 724/2026 vide order dated 12.05.2026, the present applicant is also entitled to parity, particularly when his implication is the same as co-accused Vansh Dewangan and the applicant is also being the account holder and he is in jail since 21.04.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the present applicant was the account holder of HDFC Bank Account No. 501006869xxxxx and an amount of Rs.1,32,000/- allegedly obtained through cyber fraud was credited into the said account in three instalments. He would further submit that during investigation, the applicant's memorandum statement was recorded, wherein he disclosed that co-accused Tikaram Shriwas and Rajeshwar Sahu induced him to open the HDFC Bank account in lieu of payment of Rs.15,000/- to Rs.20,000/- and, accordingly, he provided his Aadhaar Card, PAN Card and other documents and handed over the account to them. He would submit that the bail application of the co-accused Rajeshwar Sahu and Tikaram Shriwas have already been rejected by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in MCRC No.4784/2026 and MCRC No.5987/2026 vide common order dated 10.07.2026 and the second bail application of Rajeshwar Sahu was also dismissed in MCRC No.8194/2026. However, he could not dispute the fact that co-accused Vansh Dewangan in the same Crime No.128/2026 4 has been granted anticipatory bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in MCRCA No.724/2026 vide order dated 12.05.2026. Accordingly, he submits that the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. Pursuant to the order dated 17.08.2026, the concerned Investigating Officer has filed his affidavit and disclosed the material collected during investigation. It is stated therein that the HDFC Bank account was registered in the name of the applicant and an amount of Rs.1,32,000/- allegedly derived from cyber fraud was credited into the said account in three installments. It is further stated that the applicant, in his memorandum statement, disclosed that co-accused Tikaram Shriwas and Rajeshwar Sahu induced him to open the HDFC Bank account for a consideration of Rs.15,000/- to Rs.20,000/-, pursuant to which he provided his Aadhaar Card, PAN Card and other documents and handed over the account to them. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary and the material available on record. 7. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations and the material collected during investigation, particularly that the alleged amount of Rs.1,32,000/- was credited into the HDFC Bank account of the applicant, the applicant, as reflected from his memorandum statement, had allegedly provided his Aadhaar Card, PAN Card and other documents for opening the said bank account and handed over the same to co-accused 5 Tikaram Shriwas and Rajeshwar Sahu for consideration of Rs.15,000/- to Rs.20,000/-, the role attributed to the applicant is, therefore, limited to providing his bank account for such consideration, whereas the principal allegation regarding operation and utilization of the account is against the aforesaid co-accused persons and the applicant has already undergone substantial custody in Crime No.259/2025 and has been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in MCRC No.2218/2026 vide order dated 13.04.2026 and in the present case, charge-sheet has already been filed and further custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required and co-accused Vansh Dewangan in the present crime has already been granted anticipatory bail in MCRCA No.724/2026 vide order dated 12.05.2026 and the case of the applicant is almost similar to that of co-accused Vansh Dewangan, thus, without further commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant deserves to be released on regular bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (i) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court; 6 (ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, & (iii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. dorthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Kunal