2025:CGHC:61344 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9220 of 2025

1 - Rohit Rajendra Raut S/o Rajendra Raut Aged About 36 Years R/o Swarna Petals Flat. No. P. 01, Shahupuri Satara, P.S. Shahupuri, Dist- Satara, Maharashtra.

2 - Sahil Santosh Godse S/o Santosh Godse Aged About 25 Years R/o Masve Road, Jadhav Colony, Karanje Naka, House No.210, Block- No. Cps Borgaon, District- Satara Maharashtra, 3 - Sameer Subhash Shinde S/o Subhash Shinde Aged About 23 Years R/o Sablewadi Dist- Satara, Maharashtra.

... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Incharge, P.S. Cyber Police Station Durg Range, District – Durg, C.G.

... Non-applicant RAJSHEKHAR SONI For Applicants : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocates.

Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate.

SONI Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

Order On Board

16.12.2025

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 applicants arrested in connection with Crime No. 04/2025, registered at Police Station – Cyber Police Station, Durg Range, District – Durg (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(1), 317(4) of BNS and Section 66(d) of Information Technology (IT) Act.

2. As per the prosecution story in brief, is that complainant's wife received a message on her Telegram ID from another ID claiming to offer work from home. The complainant and his wife acted as per instruction given in the said Telegram ID and were deceived into transferring money to various accounts. A written complaint was filed, alleging that the complainant and his wife were defrauded of a total of Rs. 10,60,912/- using a fake Telegram ID and personal ID. On the basis of which the crime was registered and the present applicants has been arrested by the police. Hence, this application.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case, and there is no evidence on record to prove that the applicants are involved in the online fraud. It is further submitted that the allegations are based entirely on the false allegations, and no directed evidence connects the applicant to the alleged crime. It is further submitted that there is no any previous criminal antecedents of the applicants, and the applicants are in jail since 20.08.2025 and 21.08.2025, and the trial is likely to take quite long time, hence, he prays for grant of bail.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submitted that it transpires that allegation against the present applicant is that a complainant's wife received a message on her Telegram ID from another ID claiming to offer work from home. The complainant and his wife acted as per instruction given in the said Telegram ID and were deceived into transferring money to various accounts. A written complaint was filed, alleging that the complainant and his wife were defrauded of a total of Rs. 10,60,912/-

using a fake Telegram ID and personal ID, on the basis of the complaint filed by the complainant, and applicant was arrested by the Police. Therefore, the bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected.

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 17.11.2025, the Investigating Officer of the subject crime number, Police Station – Range Cyber Durg, District – Durg (C.G.), has filed his affidavit showing the incriminating evidence collected against the applicant during the course of investigation, which is quoted here as under:

“1. That, I am posted as the Investigating Officer of the subject crime number and Station House Officer, Police Station Range Cyber Durg, District Durg (C.G.) and duly authorized to swear this affidavit on behalf of the Non Applicants/St