1 2026:CGHC:2291 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7720 of 2025 • Yogendra Kumar Sahu S/o Rampratap Sahu Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Leduva, Police Station And Tahsil Ramanujnagar, District Surajpur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Ramanujnagar (Shrinagar), District Surajpur (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Anil Kumar Gulati, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 14.01.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 48/2025, registered at Police Station – Ramanujnagar (Shrinagar), District – Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(4), 318(2), 61(2)(a) of BNS and Section 66(D) of Information Technology Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that during the investigation, by the police the documents received and after verifying the documents, VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.01.16 11:00:35 +0530 2 which was found that in the account of Omprakash Sahu who the accused in this case received the amount of cyber fraud as in three different state, the online fraud was committed and the amount of Rs.24,900/-was deposited in the account of Omprakash Sahu. during the invitation, Omprakash Sahu was arrested and in his memorandum statement, he stated that he has been informed by the present applicant that if he will be provided the account details, he will received sum of Rs.5000/- as a commission, thereafter the present applicant was arrested and the present applicant informed to the police that he provided account details and ATM to one Firoz Khan after obtaining sum of Rs.15000/- from him and it has been informed that he received the commission from Firoz and thus total 24,900/- was transferred and it was found that a sum of Rs. 15,000/- has been transferred in the account of applicant which was used for cyber fraud. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and there is no criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant. It is further submitted that during the investigation the memorandum statement of applicant and other accused persons have been recorded and the memorandum statement of applicant, the applicant categorically stated that he provided account details of one Firoz Khan and he received sum of Rs.15,000/- from him. He also submits that the applicant is in jail since 01.04.2025 and not a single penny has been transferred in the account of applicant. Further, trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail 3 application and submits that there is no criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant, and the charge-sheet has not been filed in this case. It is also submitted that in compliance of this Court’s order dated 26.11.2025, investigating Officer has filed affidavit in the present case. He further submits that during the investigation, by the police the documents received and after verifying the documents, which was found that in the account of Omprakash Sahu who the accused in this case received the amount of cyber fraud as in three different state, the online fraud was committed and the amount of Rs.24,900/-was deposited in the account of Omprakash Sahu. during the invitation, Omprakash Sahu was arrested and in his memorandum statement, he stated that he has been informed by the present applicant that if he will be provided the account details, he will received sum of Rs.5000/- as a commission, thereafter the present applicant was arrested and the present applicant informed to the police that he provided account details and ATM to one Firoz Khan after obtaining sum of Rs.15000/- from him and it has been informed that he received the commission from Firoz and thus total 24,900/- was transferred and it was found that a sum of Rs. 15,000/- has been transferred in the account of applicant, looking to the conduct of the applicant, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that there is no any criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant, the applicant is in jail since 01.04.2025 and 4 conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Let applicant, Yogendra Kumar Sahu, involved in Crime No. 48/2025, registered at Police Station – Ramanujnagar (Shrinagar), District – Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(4), 318(2), 61(2)(a) of BNS and Section 66(D) of Information Technology Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the 5 opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali