1 CGHC010201862026 2026:CGHC:29001 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4784 of 2026 Teekaram Shriwas S/o Bhagirathi Shriwas Aged About 29 Years R/o KUNAL DEWANGAN Village Mudpar, P.S. And Tahsil Nawagarh, Distt. Janjgir Champa, Digitally signed by KUNAL Chhattisgarh. DEWANGAN --- Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Nawagarh, Distt. Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh. --- Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Vivek Singhal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Adv. MCRC No. 5987 of 2026 Rajeshwar Sahu S/o Banshilal Sahu, Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Thakurdiya, Police Station And Tahsil Nawagarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ---Applicant(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Nawagarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ----Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Gourav Singhal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Supriya Upasane, Govt. Adv. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 2 10/07/2026 1. Since the above two bail applications are arising out of same crime number and same offence so they are being heard and decided by this common order.

2. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.128/2026, registered at Police Station Nawagarh, District: Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 318(4), 111(2) and read with Section 3(5) of BNS, 2023. 3. As per the prosecution case, upon perusal of the case diary, it transpires that Crime No.128/2026 has been registered at Police Station Nawagarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) against the present applicants, namely, Tikaram Shrivas and Rajeshwar Sahu, along with co-accused Narendra Mathur, for the offences punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 318(4), 111(2) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. It is alleged that during the period from the year 2019 to 2024, the applicants, in furtherance of their common intention, conspired with each other and got opened six bank accounts in the names of Gautam Devangan, Nanki God, Tulsi God and three other persons in HDFC Bank, Rachabhatha Branch, Nawagarh, by adopting fraudulent means for the purpose of receiving proceeds of cyber fraud. It is further alleged that the applicants received commission of ₹15,000/-to ₹20,000/- for opening each such bank account. During the course of investigation, it was found that an amount of ₹20,40,244/-3

received through cyber fraud was credited into the aforesaid bank accounts during the period from 12.11.2023 to 24.09.2024. Accordingly, the present crime has been registered against the applicants.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that they have neither committed nor participated in the alleged offences and that the material collected during the course of investigation does not disclose any prima facie case against them. It is further submitted that the applicants have been implicated solely on the basis of the memorandum statements of the co-accused persons and that their names do not find place in the First Information Report. Learned counsel further submits that the applicants have neither demanded any money from any person nor has any incriminating transaction been found in their respective bank accounts. It is also contended that the co-accused, namely, Vansh Kumar Dewangan, has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 12.05.2026 passed in MCRCA No.724/2026 and, therefore, the applicants are also entitled to the benefit of parity. It is further submitted that the applicants are in judicial custody since 23.04.2026, the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, they have no criminal antecedents and there is no likelihood of their absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicants be enlarged on regular bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail 4

applications and submits that the present applicants are involved in a well-organized cyber fraud racket wherein bank accounts were fraudulently opened for receiving the proceeds of cyber fraud and substantial amounts were routed through such accounts. It is submitted that the investigation has revealed the active involvement of the applicants in the commission of the alleged offences and therefore, a prima facie case is made out against them. Learned State counsel further submits that the anticipatory bail granted to co-accused Vansh Kumar Dewangan vide order dated 12.05.2026 passed in MCRCA No.724/2026 does not entitle the present applicants to claim parity, as the said co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail, whereas the present applications are for grant of regular bail after arrest and both stand on different footings. It is further submitted that looking to the nature and gravity of the offences, the manner in which the alleged crime has been committed and the stage of investigation, the applicants are not entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, it is prayed that the bail applications deserve to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.

7. In compliance of the Court's order dated 17.06.2026, the concerned Investigating Officer has filed an affidavit disclosing the evidence collected during the course of investigation. It has been stated therein that investigation revealed that an amount of ₹20,40,244/-, being the proceeds of cyber fraud, was deposited in the bank accounts fraudulently opened in HDFC Bank, Rachha Branch, 5 Nawagarh, during the period from 12.11.2023 to 24.09.2024 through complaints lodged by victims from different States on the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal (1930). It is further disclosed that during investigation, the memorandum statements of the accused persons were recorded, wherein the present applicants have been specifically implicated in fraudulently opening the aforesaid bank accounts by using the documents of innocent persons and receiving commission for facilitating the transfer of cyber fraud proceeds. The affidavit further states that electronic evidence, including mobile phone data and banking transactions collected during investigation, prima facie indicates the involvement of the applicants in the alleged transactions and their participation in an organized cyber fraud syndicate, on the basis of which Section 111 of the BNS has also been invoked against them.

8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicants, the prosecution case, the material collected during the course of investigation, the affidavit filed by the concerned Investigating Officer in compliance with the order dated 17.06.2026 and upon perusal of the case diary, this Court finds that the allegations against the present applicants are not confined to a solitary or isolated transaction but disclose their prima facie involvement in an organized cyber fraud syndicate. The material available on record prima facie indicates that several bank accounts were fraudulently opened in the names of different persons for the purpose of receiving the proceeds of cyber fraud committed against victims 6 residing in various States of the country and an amount of ₹20,40,244/- was routed through such accounts during the relevant period. The investigation further reveals that the applicants allegedly played an active role in facilitating the opening and operation of such bank accounts and received commission therefor. The electronic evidence, banking transactions and other material collected during investigation prima facie support the prosecution case.

9. Considering the seriousness of the allegations, the manner in which the alleged offence has been committed, the organized nature of the crime, the possibility of the applicants influencing witnesses or hampering the course of investigation/trial if enlarged on bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is not inclined to extend the benefit of regular bail to the applicants. 10. Accordingly the bail applications of the applicants namely-Teekaram Shriwas and Rajeshwar Sahu, involved in Crime No.128/2026, registered at Police Station Nawagarh, District: Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 318(4), 111(2) and read with Section 3(5) of BNS, 2023, is rejected. 11. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 12. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal

1 CGHC010201862026 2026:CGHC:29001 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4784 of 2026 Teekaram Shriwas S/o Bhagirathi Shriwas Aged About 29 Years R/o KUNAL DEWANGAN Village Mudpar, P.S. And Tahsil Nawagarh, Distt. Janjgir Champa, Digitally signed by KUNAL Chhattisgarh. DEWANGAN --- Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Nawagarh, Distt. Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh. --- Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Vivek Singhal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Adv. MCRC No. 5987 of 2026 Rajeshwar Sahu S/o Banshilal Sahu, Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Thakurdiya, Police Station And Tahsil Nawagarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ---Applicant(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Nawagarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ----Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Gourav Singhal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Supriya Upasane, Govt. Adv. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 2 10/07/2026 1. Since the above two bail applications are arising out of same crime number and same offence so they are being heard and decided by this common order.

2. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.128/2026, registered at Police Station Nawagarh, District: Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 318(4), 111(2) and read with Section 3(5) of BNS, 2023. 3. As per the prosecution case, upon perusal of the case diary, it transpires that Crime No.128/2026 has been registered at Police Station Nawagarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) against the present applicants, namely, Tikaram Shrivas and Rajeshwar Sahu, along with co-accused Narendra Mathur, for the offences punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 318(4), 111(2) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. It is alleged that during the period from the year 2019 to 2024, the applicants, in furtherance of their common intention, conspired with each other and got opened six bank accounts in the names of Gautam Devangan, Nanki God, Tulsi God and three other persons in HDFC Bank, Rachabhatha Branch, Nawagarh, by adopting fraudulent means for the purpose of receiving proceeds of cyber fraud. It is further alleged that the applicants received commission of ₹15,000/-to ₹20,000/- for opening each such bank account. During the course of investigation, it was found that an amount of ₹20,40,244/-3

received through cyber fraud was credited into the aforesaid bank accounts during the period from 12.11.2023 to 24.09.2024. Accordingly, the present crime has been registered against the applicants.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that they have neither committed nor participated in the alleged offences and that the material collected during the course of investigation does not disclose any prima facie case against them. It is further submitted that the applicants have been implicated solely on the basis of the memorandum statements of the co-accused persons and that their names do not find place in the First Information Report. Learned counsel further submits that the applicants have neither demanded any money from any person nor has any incriminating transaction been found in their respective bank accounts. It is also contended that the co-accused, namely, Vansh Kumar Dewangan, has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 12.05.2026 passed in MCRCA No.724/2026 and, therefore, the applicants are also entitled to the benefit of parity. It is further submitted that the applicants are in judicial custody since 23.04.2026, the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, they have no criminal antecedents and there is no likelihood of their absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicants be enlarged on regular bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail 4

applications and submits that the present applicants are involved in a well-organized cyber fraud racket wherein bank accounts were fraudulently opened for receiving the proceeds of cyber fraud and substantial amounts were routed through such accounts. It is submitted that the investigation has revealed the active involvement of the applicants in the commission of the alleged offences and therefore, a prima facie case is made out against them. Learned State counsel further submits that the anticipatory bail granted to co-accused Vansh Kumar Dewangan vide order dated 12.05.2026 passed in MCRCA No.724/2026 does not entitle the present applicants to claim parity, as the said co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail, whereas the present applications are for grant of regular bail after arrest and both stand on different footings. It is further submitted that looking to the nature and gravity of the offences, the manner in which the alleged crime has been committed and the stage of investigation, the applicants are not entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, it is prayed that the bail applications deserve to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.

7. In compliance of the Court's order dated 17.06.2026, the concerned Investigating Officer has filed an affidavit disclosing the evidence collected during the course of investigation. It has been stated therein that investigation revealed that an amount of ₹20,40,244/-, being the proceeds of cyber fraud, was deposited in the bank accounts fraudulently opened in HDFC Bank, Rachha Branch, 5 Nawagarh, during the period from 12.11.2023 to 24.09.2024 through complaints lodged by victims from different States on the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal (1930). It is further disclosed that during investigation, the memorandum statements of the accused persons were recorded, wherein the present applicants have been specifically implicated in fraudulently opening the aforesaid bank accounts by using the documents of innocent persons and receiving commission for facilitating the transfer of cyber fraud proceeds. The affidavit further states that electronic evidence, including mobile phone data and banking transactions collected during investigation, prima facie indicates the involvement of the applicants in the alleged transactions and their participation in an organized cyber fraud syndicate, on the basis of which Section 111 of the BNS has also been invoked against them.

8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicants, the prosecution case, the material collected during the course of investigation, the affidavit filed by the concerned Investigating Officer in compliance with the order dated 17.06.2026 and upon perusal of the case diary, this Court finds that the allegations against the present applicants are not confined to a solitary or isolated transaction but disclose their prima facie involvement in an organized cyber fraud syndicate. The material available on record prima facie indicates that several bank accounts were fraudulently opened in the names of different persons for the purpose of receiving the proceeds of cyber fraud committed against victims 6 residing in various States of the country and an amount of ₹20,40,244/- was routed through such accounts during the relevant period. The investigation further reveals that the applicants allegedly played an active role in facilitating the opening and operation of such bank accounts and received commission therefor. The electronic evidence, banking transactions and other material collected during investigation prima facie support the prosecution case.

9. Considering the seriousness of the allegations, the manner in which the alleged offence has been committed, the organized nature of the crime, the possibility of the applicants influencing witnesses or hampering the course of investigation/trial if enlarged on bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is not inclined to extend the benefit of regular bail to the applicants. 10. Accordingly the bail applications of the applicants namely-Teekaram Shriwas and Rajeshwar Sahu, involved in Crime No.128/2026, registered at Police Station Nawagarh, District: Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 318(4), 111(2) and read with Section 3(5) of BNS, 2023, is rejected. 11. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 12. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal