Regular bail may be granted to a woman accused in a cyber-crime/money laundering case if the charge-sheet is filed, the accused has no criminal antecedents, and has spent a significant period in custody, despite the volume of complaints.

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Ruchit Vyas appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. J.K. Shah appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.

2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent-State.

3. The applicant has filed this application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for enlarging the applicant on Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11824001252464 of 2025 registered with Vyara Police Station, District: Tapi for the offence punishable under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 317(2), 3(5) and 61(2)(A) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act.

4. Learned Advocate for the applicant would submit that considering the role attributed to the applicant, and nature of the allegation levelled, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail. It is further submitted that since the charge-sheet is filed no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in jail for indefinite period. It is further contended that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions that may be imposed by this Court if released on bail.

5. As against the same, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent – State has vehemently objected to the grant of regular bail. Learned APP has submitted that looking to the nature of offence and the role attributed to the present applicant as coming out from the charge-sheet, this Court may not exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant and the application may be dismissed.

6. This Court has heard learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the papers. Following aspects are considered:-

(i) The allegation being that the accused had committed the offence of laundering money through the medium of mule accounts, the money laundered, prima facie being proceeds of Cyber offences.

(ii) The allegation against the present applicant specifically being that she had provided her accounts as well as around 28 other accounts to the co-accused, and whereas around Rs. 60,00,000/- which are proceeds of crime, having come to the said accounts and 157 complaints being registered against the account in total, in the NCCR Portal.

(iii) As against the same, this Court has considered the fact that the co-accused, are stated to be brother and sister-in-law of the applicant i.e. accounts provided by the applicant to her own brother.

(iv) This Court has also considered the fact that the applicant is a lady accused, in custody since 11.12.2025 and the charge-sheet having been filed been filed by the Investigating Officer and the applicant not having any antecedents.

(v) Considering the above though prima facie it would appear that the present applicant may have been an integral part of the offence, and whereas though it would appear that though a large number of complaints that is 157 in numbers having been registered in NCCR Portal, yet considering that the applicant being a lady accused, without any antecedent in custody since four months this Court is inclined to consider the present application.

This Court has taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in [2012] 1 SCC 40

7. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant in the First Inf