1 CGHC010355802026 2026:CGHC:43041 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8600 of 2026 Shubham Shrivastava @ Monti Lala S/o Ganesh Prasad Shrivastava Aged About 23 Years R/o 46 Shriram Nagar Colony Barkherva Lakhimpur Khiri, Tahsil And District Lakhimpur U.P. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer (S.H.O.), Police Station Newai Bhilai Durg, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. S.C. Verma, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Mohammad Naqeeb, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Rakesh Mohan Pandey, Judge Order on Board 05/10/2026 1. This is the third bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.156/2025 registered at Police Station Newai, District Durg (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act, 2000. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 2. It is relevant to mention that the first bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court in M.Cr.C. No.6415/2025 vide order dated 11.09.2025, with liberty to file afresh. Thereafter, the second bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits by a coordinate Bench of this Court in M.Cr.C. No.8373/2025 vide order dated 05.12.2025. Hence this third bail application. 3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that during the period from 29.04.2025 to 29.05.2025, certain persons impersonating CBI officers contacted the complainant's father and by falsely alleging that his bank account was involved in money-laundering transactions, induced the complainant and his family members to transfer a total amount of Rs.54,90,000/- into various bank accounts. Upon an additional demand of Rs.22,00,000/-, the complainant realized that he had been cheated and lodged a report. During investigation, the applicant was arrested and a mobile phone, SIM card and identification document were seized from him. After investigation, charge-sheet as been filed before the competent Court. 4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing through V.C. for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He would further submit that out of seven accused persons, five co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court as well as by the learned Sessions Court. He would contend that out of the total amount of Rs.54,90,000/- allegedly transferred by the 3 complainant, an amount of Rs.9,00,000/- was transferred into the bank account of co-accused Rajesh Vishwakarma, from which the present applicant is alleged to have withdrawn the said amount. He would further submit that the applicant is in jail since 14.06.2025, the charge-sheet has already been filed, the case is triable by the Magistrate and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time. Therefore, he would pray for grant of bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the prayer for grant of bail and submit that the proceeds of crime were transferred into various bank accounts, including the bank account of co-accused Rajesh Vishwakarma, from which the present applicant allegedly withdrew an amount of Rs.9,00,000/-. He would further submit that the first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn and thereafter the second bail application was rejected on merits by a coordinate Bench of this Court in M.Cr.C. No.8373/2025 vide order dated 05.12.2025. Hence, the applicant is not entitled to grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary as well as the material available on record. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, the fact that charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and the applicant has no criminal antecedents and further considering the allegation that an amount of Rs.9,00,000/- was transferred into the bank account of co-accused Rajesh 4 Vishwakarma and the present applicant is alleged to have withdrawn the said amount, coupled with the fact that the applicant is in custody since 14.06.2025 and the other co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail and further considering that the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, without further commenting upon the merits of the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 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; (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. - S/- Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Kunal