1 2026:CGHC:18993 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2543 of 2026 Jaiprakash Dhirhe S/o Bhushan Ram Dhirhe Aged About 21 Years R/o Dhamni Ps Hasoud, District Shakti (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through, Ps Surajpur District -Surajpur, (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. F.S. Khare, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Dy. Govt. Adv. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24.04.2026 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.150/2025, registered at Police Station – Surajpur, District- Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(4), 318(2), 61(2)(A) of BNS and Section 66 (D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. 2 The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that upon perusal of the case record, it emerges that multiple victims, having fallen prey to cyber fraud, lodged their complaints through the online portal operated by the Indian Cyber Cell. During the course of investigation of these complaints, it was ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.04.27 17:21:21 +0530 2 revealed that certain fraudulent transactions were routed through Bank of Maharashtra Account No. 60477170109, standing in the name of the main accused, namely Anand Kumar Sahu, which had been provided to co-accused Saurabh Sahu. Upon obtaining the bank details and account statements from the concerned bank, it was found that the said account was actively used for receiving and transferring amounts obtained through cyber fraud from various victims, thereby establishing a clear financial trail linked with the offence. Accordingly, Crime No. 150/2025 was registered against the main accused Anand Kumar Sahu for offences punishable under Sections 420, 413, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, as well as Sections 317(4), 318(2), and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and investigation was set into motion. During custodial interrogation, the main accused Anand Kumar Sahu disclosed that the accused persons, namely Saurabh Sahu and Aman Sahu, along with others, were key conspirators and facilitators of a larger cyber fraud racket operating across multiple States. It was further revealed that these accused persons, in connivance with cyber fraudsters, used to lure individuals by offering monetary incentives ranging from Rs. 6,000/- to Rs. 12,000/- in exchange for obtaining their bank accounts. Thereafter, the accused persons would procure the bank account details, ATM cards, and SIM cards linked to such accounts and subsequently provide the same to members of organized cyber fraud syndicates, thereby enabling them to carry out fraudulent transactions and siphon off money from unsuspecting victims through illegal means. During further investigation, the accused Suraj Diwan was also found to be one of the key facilitators and conspirators in the said cyber crime network. It was specifically revealed that amounts aggregating to Rs. 35,000/-, Rs. 65,000/- and Rs. 1,70,000/- defrauded from various victims, were 3 transacted through the bank accounts linked with the arrested accused persons. Furthermore, necessary information regarding the involvement of the accused persons has been duly communicated to the police authorities of the concerned States, and further investigation is underway to trace and apprehend other co-accused involved in the organized cyber fraud racket. As per the charge-sheet, it is prima facie established that the present accused/applicants actively facilitated the commission of cyber fraud by providing and/or selling bank accounts to the main accused persons, thereby knowingly aiding and abetting the commission of such offences. Therefore, the aforementioned crime has been registered against the applicant with the aforesaid offences. 3 Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. It is further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and is the sole bread earner of his family and his prolonged pre-trial detention, since 01.04.2025, has caused severe hardship to his dependents and adversely affected their livelihood. He further contends that the prosecution witnesses have categorically deposed before the Court that they neither know nor can identify the applicant, namely Jaiprakash Dhirhe, which clearly indicates absence of any direct evidence connecting him with the alleged offence. It is also submitted that prosecution witness PW-04 (Additional Superintendent of Police), in his cross-examination, has admitted that the directions issued by him to the Station House Officer for registration of FIR against mule accounts did not contain the name of the present applicant. Therefore, in light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is argued that the evidence produced by the prosecution is doubtful in nature and fails to prima facie establish any direct involvement of the applicant in the alleged offence. 4 4 On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature and pertain to a well-organized cyber fraud racket involving financial transactions through mule accounts; the material collected during investigation, including bank records and transaction details, prima facie establishes the applicant’s involvement in facilitating the offence. It is further submitted that considering the gravity of the offence, the manner of its commission, and the possibility of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. It is also pointed out that the bail application of co- accused, namely Sourabh Sahu, has already been rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 1163/2026 vide order dated 04.02.2026, therefore, on the ground of parity, the present applicant’s bail application also deserves to be rejected. 5 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 6 In compliance with the order dated 24.03.2026, the Investigating Officer has filed an affidavit stating that during investigation it was revealed that bank accounts, including that of the present applicant Jai Prakash Dhirhe, were being used for routing proceeds of cyber frauds committed across various States and a network of accused persons, namely Saurabh Sahu, Aman Sahu, Suraj Diwan and Nitesh Sahu, was unearthed, who, in collusion with cyber fraudsters, procured bank accounts and SIM cards from individuals on monetary inducement. It is further revealed that the present applicant, in his extra-judicial confession, admitted that on the inducement of co-accused Suraj Diwan, he opened a UCO Bank account and handed over the account, ATM 5 card and SIM card in lieu of Rs. 15,000 per month. Investigation further discloses that an amount of Rs. 17,26,870/- obtained through cyber fraud from multiple victims across different States was transacted through the said account, linked to 13 complaints and the bank statement reflects that between 12.09.2024 and 03.10.2024, total credits of Rs. 51,28,937/- and debits of Rs. 51,31,836/- were made, thereby indicating large-scale fraudulent transactions. The applicant was arrested on 05.04.2025 in connection with Crime No. 150/2025 registered at Police Station Surajpur, District Surajpur (C.G.) for offences punishable under Sections 317(4), 318(4) and 61(2)(A) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. 7 Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the present applicant and the material collected during the course of investigation, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. The record prima facie reflects that the applicant was actively involved in facilitating a well-organized cyber fraud racket by providing his bank account, ATM card and SIM card to co- accused persons for monetary consideration, which were subsequently used for routing large-scale proceeds of crime amounting to several lakhs of rupees collected from multiple victims across different States. The bank statements and investigation material clearly indicate continuous and substantial financial transactions linked with fraudulent activities, thereby establishing a direct nexus of the applicant with the alleged offence. The extra-judicial confession of the applicant further strengthens the prosecution case at this stage. Considering the seriousness of the offence, its organized nature, and its wide impact on unsuspecting victims, coupled with the possibility of the applicant 6 influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail. Furthermore, the bail application of co-accused Saurabh Sahu has already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 04.02.2026 in MCRC No. 1163/2026, and therefore, on the ground of parity as well, no case for grant of bail is made out in favour of the present applicant. 8 Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Jai Prakash Dhirhe, involved in Crime No.150/2025, registered at Police Station – Surajpur, District- Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(4), 318(2), 61(2)(A) of BNS and Section 66 (D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, is rejected. 9 Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 10 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 Abhishek