1 2026:CGHC:16096 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 904 of 2026 Atul Upadhyay S/o Anil Kumar Upadhyay Aged About 23 Years R/o Sristi Vihar, Mahharshi Road, Bilaspur, Tahsil And Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Range Cyber Crime, Bilaspur, District – Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sunil Verma, Advocates. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 08.04.2026 1. This is the First 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. 08/2025, registered at Police Station – Range Cyber Crime, Bilaspur, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 61, 317(5), 318(4), 111(3)(4) and 323 of the BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that when the mule account of the applicant has been investigated by the Indian Criminal Coordinator Centre, it appears from the case diary that the Cyber Cell informed on 13.02.2025, it is alleged that several bank accounts for online fraud and a total amount of Rs. 97,83,492/- was allegedly transferred in 82 Bank Accounts, and that the applicant is one of the accused persons. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 The Police of Police Station concerned has registered the crime against the applicant and other accused persons and arrested the applicant. Hence, this application. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. It is further submitted that no incriminating material or proceeds of crime have been recovered from the applicant. The entire case is based on such conjecture and surmises without any direct material evidence against the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 11.09.2025, and the conclusion of the trial shall take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that from the perusal of the case-diary it transpires that the material collected during investigation clearly 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. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. In compliance of the Court’s order dated 28.01.2026, the Investigating Officer of the case, Police Station – Range Cyber, Bilaspur, District – Bilaspur (C.G.), has filed his affidavit showing the incriminating 3 evidence collected against the applicant during the course of investigation, which is quoted here as under: “1. That, I Suresh Pathak, posted as Assistant Sub- Inspector, Police Station Range Cyber, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G), as such I am aware of the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. At the outset, the deponent respectfully submits that, he is duty bound to follow all the directions & orders passed by this Hon'ble Court from time to time and is having deepest & highest regard for this Hon'ble Court. He shall take all measures to ensure compliance of the orders and directions of this Hon'ble Court and shall leave no stone unturned to see that the commands of this Hon'ble Court are complied. 3. That, in the instant bail application has been filed by the applicant in connection with the Crime No. 08/2025 registered at Police Station Cyber Crime in Bilaspur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 61, 317(5), 318(4),111(3) (4) and 323 of BNS. 4. That, in the present case on 28.01.2026 the Hon'ble court has directed to file the personal affidavit of the concerned Investigation Officer disclosing the evidence collected during the course of investigation against the applicant. Hence, in compliance of the Hon'ble Court order dated 28.01.2026 the instant affidavit is being filed. 5. That, the police headquarter has received an direction regarding the investigation of the mule account on 27.10.2023, thereafter, by the way of the coordination portal which is being worked under the guideline of the Government of India the investigation of the mule account is being started. 6. That, in furtherance of the investigation police has collected the details of total 82 bank accounts, whereby a huge amount of Rs. 97,83,492/- has been transacted. During the investigation police has called certain peoples for the investigation who are connected with the aforesaid accounts and it was found that the present applicant Atul Upadhyay, who is a resident of Mangla Chowk, Bilaspur, has opened a bank account at Kotak Mahindra Bank, the bank account bearing No. 7048052756. Subsequently, in the month of 4 December, 2024 it has been offer by Amit Dewangan to the present applicant that Amit Dewangan is working for online gaming work from home and share trading. On the guides of the same he committed online fraud with the people and he need certain bank accounts for transaction. He took the aforesaid bank account which has belonged to the Atul Upadhyay the present applicant and promised him to give five percent of the amount of transaction as a commission. 7. That, during the investigation the police has found that Atul Upadhyay is having the bank account No. 7048052756, which belongs to Kotak Mahindra Bank against which a complaint at the Cyber Police Portal has been registered from Madhya Pradesh, the complaint No. is 2211224003321, in which two amount of Rs. 15,000/- and 39,000/- has been transacted. 8. That, during the investigation it was found that the applicant Atul Upadhyay is having two mobile No. 7869903848 and 7566670379, which was being used to speak with another co-accused Amit Dewangan. From the bank statement it was revealed that from the account of Atul Updhyay total amount of 3,43,348 has been credited and 3,39,485 has been debited. It is also pertinent to mention here that on the memorandum of Atul Upadhyay has been recorded in presence of two witnesses Syed Sajid and Deepak Koushik. On the basis of the memorandum ATM card, cheque book was stated to be kept by Amit Dewangan and from the possession of the applicant Atul Upadhyay one mobile of OPPO A76 having two sims No. 7566670379 and 9406280579 has been seized. 9. That, the memorandum of one co-accused Amit Dewangan has also been recorded in presence of two witnesses Syed Sajid and Deepak Koushik in which he stated that he borrowed the bank account of Atul Upadhyay for the transaction against which he promised to pay an amount as a commission. 10. That, to verify the bank transaction the bank statement of Atul Upadhyay has also been seized. Hence, against the applicant there is a cogent evidence of his memorandum, memorandum of co-accused, bank transaction records. Hence, the above mentioned evidences have been collected against the present applicant. 5 11. That, it is respectfully submitted that the deponent herein has immense respect for the orders and directions given by this Hon'ble Court and the deponent herein is bound to act as per the directions passed by this Hon'ble Court and in accordance with law. 12. That, the submissions made hereinabove and the factual pleadings contained therein are true to my knowledge as derived from the official records and believed by me to be true.” 7. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, allegations levelled against the applicant in the FIR, and upon due consideration of the affidavit filed by the Investigating Officer pursuant to the order of this Court, and the material collected during the course of investigation, it transpires that a prima facie case is made out against the present applicant. The investigation reveals that, on the basis of information received through the coordination portal under the guidelines of the Government of India, as many as 82 bank accounts have been identified wherein a total amount of Rs. 97,83,492/- has been transacted, indicating the existence of an organized cyber fraud network involving mule bank accounts. 8. During investigation, it has surfaced that the present applicant Atul Upadhyay had opened a bank account bearing No. 7048052756 in Kotak Mahindra Bank, which was subsequently handed over to co- accused Amit Dewangan for the purpose of carrying out online fraudulent transactions in lieu of commission. The material on record further indicates that in the said account, transactions amounting to Rs. 3,43,348/- (credited) and Rs. 3,39,485/- (debited) have taken place, including specific fraudulent transactions of Rs. 15,000/- and Rs. 39,000/-, as reflected in a complaint registered on the Cyber Crime 6 Portal from the State of Madhya Pradesh. 9. The memorandum statements of the applicant as well as the co- accused, coupled with the bank records, seized mobile phone and other incriminating material, prima facie establish that the applicant knowingly allowed his bank account to be used as a mule account for routing proceeds of cyber fraud. Such conduct reflects conscious participation in facilitating financial crimes, which form part of a larger organized illegal activity. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the magnitude of the transactions involved, the organized modus operandi adopted by the accused persons, and the possibility of the applicant absconding or influencing witnesses if enlarged on bail, this Court is not inclined to grant the benefit of bail to the applicant at this stage. 10. Accordingly, this first bail application of applicant – Atul Upadhyay, involved in Crime No. 08/2025, registered at Police Station – Range Cyber Crime, Bilaspur, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 61, 317(5), 318(4), 111(3)(4) and 323 of the BNS, is rejected at this stage. 11. Needless to say that the learned trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed with the trial and conclude the same, expeditiously. 12. 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 Rajshekhar