1 CGHC010387792026 2026:CGHC:43374 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9456 of 2026 • Ravikant Sahu S/o Ramesh Kumar Sahu Aged About 25 Years R/o Village - Sarona, Police Station - Sarona, District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Kondagaon, District : Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Pramod Ramteke, Advocate For State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 07.10 .2026 1. This is the third bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been 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), 3(5) of BNS and 66D of IT Act. 2. Earlier, first bail application i.e. MCRC No. 8967 of 2025 was rejected on merits vide order dated 11.03.2026 and repeat application i.e. MCRC No. 3144 of 2026 was rejected by detailed order vide order dated 20.04.2026. 3. The prosecution story, in short, is that a cyber financial fraud was reported on SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2026.10.08 11:38:16 +0530 2 the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal, pursuant to which Police Station Kondagaon conducted an enquiry. During enquiry, it was found that an amount of Rs.72,09,424/- was credited and transferred through the bank account of Lokeshwar Hirwani, which was allegedly being used for receiving and transferring the proceeds of cyber fraud. It is alleged that the applicant and other co-accused persons had obtained the passbook, cheque book and internet banking credentials of the said account holder and used the account for the aforesaid transactions. Accordingly, case was registered and on the basis of the memorandum statements of Lokeshwar Hirwani and Kameshwar Nag, the present applicant was arrested on 07.10.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that there is a substantial change in circumstances after rejection of the earlier bail applications, four prosecution witnesses have been examined out of 12 and they have not supported the case of prosecution. He would further submit that applicant is in jail since 07.10.2025, charge-sheet has already been filed, and trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. He would also submit that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and co-accused Aman Paswan has already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No.7330 of 2026 vide order dated 02.09.2026. He would pray to allow this application. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State would oppose the bail application. He would further submit that case of the present applicant is distinguishable from co-accused Aman Paswan as specific allegations have been made against the present applicant that he induced the bank account holder to open a joint account and obtained the said account for use in the alleged cyber fraud. He would submit that mere examination of four 3 prosecution witnesses does not constitute a substantial change in circumstances, as the trial is still in progress and other witnesses remain to be examined. He would further submit that there is no change in circumstances, and thus, the application is liable to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. It is a well-settled principle of law that, while entertaining a bail application, the High Court cannot conduct a mini-trial or undertake a detailed examination of the evidence. The reliability and credibility of the witnesses are matters to be assessed by the learned Trial Court during course of trial and cannot be assessed at this stage. Though, four prosecution witnesses have already been examined, but their credibility and reliability is required to be considered by the learned Trial Court during the course of trial. With regard to parity with co-accused Aman Paswan, case of present applicant is distinguishable as there is specific allegations against him of inducing the account holder to open a joint account and obtaining the same for the alleged cyber fraud. Further, during course of investigation, various bank passbooks, ATM cards, mobile phones and SIM cards were seized from the possession of the applicant, which indicate prima facie involvement of the applicant in large-scale cyber fraud. 8. Having considered the fact that specific allegations have been made against the applicant with regard to inducing the account holder to open a joint bank account and obtaining the same for the alleged cyber fraud, two applications were rejected on merits vide order dated 11.03.2026 and 20.04.2026 and the allegations against the present applicant and the co-accused, who has been 4 enlarged on bail are different, I am not inclined to allow instant bail application. 9. Accordingly, this application fails and is hereby rejected. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE $iddhant