MCRC/8386/2026 of MANOJ KUMAR JI Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 11 October 2026

1. The applicant has preferred this second 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. 03/2026 registered at Police Station Ambagarh,

District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 317(4) and 3(5) of the BNS and Section 66(D) of the IT Act.

2. As per the prosecution story, the complainant, Kunal Agrawal, lodged a written report alleging that during the period from 07.11.2025 to 06.12.2025, an unknown person, posing as a representative of a share trading/investment platform through WhatsApp and a mobile application, induced him to invest money by promising exorbitant returns from online share trading. Believing the representations made by the accused, the complainant transferred a total sum of 1,49,50,000/- from his ₹

Punjab National Bank and HDFC Bank accounts to various bank accounts as instructed by the accused. Subsequently, when the complainant attempted to withdraw the invested amount, the accused demanded further deposits on the pretext of loan repayment and other charges, whereupon the complainant realized that he had been cheated. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the police registered the present crime under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and during the course of investigation, Sections 317(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 66D of the InformationTechnology Act. 2000 were also added.

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 no cogent material is available to connect the applicant with the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the entire case is based on documentary and electronic evidence, which is already in the custody of the investigating agency, the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has been filed. It is also submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 21.02.2026, has no criminal antecedents and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. He would also submit that co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 29/07/2026 and 31/08/2026 passed in MCRC Nos. 5977/2026 and 7034/2026, respectively. On these grounds, prayer has been made to enlarge the applicant on bail.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature. He would further submit that a total of 26 complaints were made by the complainants from various cities with regard to online fraud against the present applicant. It is further submitted that Rs. 5,00,000/- was found in the bank account of the applicant and his sim card was being operated from Kathmandu, Nepal. As such, it is prayed that the bail application be rejected.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the serious allegations of online fraud levelled against the present applicant, and further considering the active role of the applicant in commission of crime as a total of 26 complaints were made by different complainants from different cities against the applicant and an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- was seized from his bank account and further his sim card was being operated from Kathmandu, Nepal, I am not inclined to release the present applicant on bail.

7. Accordingly, this bail application is hereby rejected. Sd/-

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)

JUDGE Harneet