1 2026:CGHC:7428 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10346 of 2025 Imran Khan S/o Ahmed Ibrahim Aged About 33 Years R/o House No. 217, Gautiya Para, Pawni, P.O.- Pawni, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Bilaigarh, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10.02.2026 1. This is the first 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.113/2025 registered at Police Station – Bilaigarh, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471, 120B & 34 of the IPC and Section VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.02.12 11:01:51 +0530 2 66(C) 66(D) of the Information Technology Act 2000. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant Puran Das Vaishnav, a retired ASI, lodged a written complaint on 15.04.2025 alleging that from 03.09.2016 to 29.06.2024 the applicant was running a KIOSK Choice Centre at Bilaigarh and during this period the complainant’s father, Late Anand Das Vaishnav, used to visit the said KIOSK centre for withdrawal of money from his bank account. Due to his old age, he sometimes requested the applicant to visit his residence for completing the formalities related to withdrawal of money and banking procedures, including submission of life certificate and KYC verification. It is alleged that the applicant, taking advantage of this situation and under the pretext of updating KYC, obtained the thumb impressions of the complainant’s father and subsequently withdrew lump-sum amounts from his account without his knowledge. The complainant further alleged that the applicant misappropriated the withdrawn amount and purchased property in the name of his father, who is a co-accused in the case. It is specifically alleged that the applicant withdrew an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- on 13.12.2018 and Rs. 2,00,000/- on 06.05.2019 by preparing forged bond documents. On the basis of these allegations, offences have been registered against the applicant and other co-accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that he has neither obtained any amount nor derived any benefit from the alleged transactions and has no connection with the alleged offences. The complainant himself has stated that his relative, 3 namely Digamber Vaishnav, used to look after the bank account of his father, which clearly indicates that the applicant had no role in the alleged withdrawals. It is further submitted that the property and four- wheeler attributed to the applicant were purchased in the years 2011 and 2015 respectively, much prior to the alleged incidents, and the relevant documents have been filed as Annexure A-3. There is also an unexplained delay of more than eight years in lodging the FIR, as the alleged incidents relate to the years 2016 to 2019 and no complaint was made during the lifetime of the complainant’s father nor any query was raised regarding the withdrawals. It is also submitted that the son of deceased Parmeshwar Das had purchased land in his own name in the year 2020 from the amount withdrawn by the complainant himself, yet the applicant has been falsely implicated, and the relevant sale deed has been filed as Annexure A-4. The co-accused has already been granted bail by the Hon’ble High Court of Chhattisgarh in MCRCA No. 625/2025 vide order dated 02.05.2025. It is further submitted that there is no evidence on record connecting the applicant with the alleged crime, the charge sheet has already been filed, custodial interrogation is not required, and the applicant undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not to tamper with evidence or influence witnesses. The applicant is in judicial custody since 18.08.2025, therefore, the applicant prays for grant of bail. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that, in compliance with the order dated 15.12.2025, the Investigating Officer has filed his personal affidavit disclosing the evidence collected during investigation, which clearly establishes the involvement of the applicant in the alleged offence. It is submitted that the applicant, 4 while operating a KIOSK banking centre, took advantage of the old age of Late Anand Das Vaishnav and, under the pretext of KYC updation, obtained his thumb impressions and fraudulently withdrew and transferred substantial amounts from his bank account and the accounts of his family members to his own accounts. The statement of the Branch Manager of SBI and the bank records confirm such transactions, and the mobile number linked with the account was found registered in the name of the applicant. During investigation, forged FD and policy documents were also verified and found to be fabricated, and several electronic devices and banking materials were seized from the possession of the applicant. After recording statements of witnesses and collecting documentary evidence, the police found sufficient material showing that the applicant committed cheating and forgery causing wrongful loss of more than Rs. 43,34,100/- to the complainant’s family, and accordingly, after completion of investigation, the charge sheet has been filed before the learned Trial Court; therefore, a strong prima facie case is made out against the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the material collected during investigation, and the specific findings reflected in the affidavit of the Investigating Officer, this Court finds that a strong prima facie case is made out against the applicant. The record indicates that substantial amounts were fraudulently withdrawn from the bank account of the deceased and his family members and transferred to the accounts of the applicant, and forged FD and policy 5 documents were also prepared, which have been verified by the concerned institutions and found to be fabricated. The statements of the bank officials and documentary evidence further support the prosecution case, and the charge sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. Looking to the seriousness of the allegations, the magnitude of the alleged misappropriation, and the material available on record, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case for grant of bail at this stage. Accordingly, the bail application filed by the applicant deserves to be and is hereby rejected. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant namely Imran Khan, involved in Crime No.113/2025 registered at Police Station – Bilaigarh, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471, 120B & 34 of the IPC and Section 66(C) 66(D) of the Information Technology Act 2000, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav