MCRCA/1476/2026 of SOHAN NISHAD Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 20 September 2026

1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 61/2026 registered at Police Station – Narayanpur, District – Narayanpur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 317 (2), 317 (5) and 318 (4) of BNS.

2. As per the prosecution story, the complainant, namely Chakradhar Vaishnav, resident of Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, submitted a complaint on 06.10.2025, bearing Complaint No. 23310250007240, alleging that the applicant, Sohan Nishad, who is the account holder of IDBI Bank Account No. 2228102000000374 (IFSC Code: IBKL0002228), had cheated the complainant and an amount of ₹7,520/- was deposited into the said bank account on 12.01.2025. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, the said IDBI Bank account was investigated. Upon examination of the bank statement of the applicant, the investigating agency allegedly found that unusual transactions amounting to a total sum of ₹1,34,23,390/- had taken place in the said account during the period from 07.01.2025 to 30.03.2025. It is further alleged by the prosecution that the applicant's bank account was being used as a "mule account" for the purpose of committing financial fraud against various persons, thereby causing wrongful loss to the alleged victims and obtaining wrongful gain from the proceeds of the alleged fraud. It is further alleged that the applicant knowingly and deliberately permitted his bank account to be used for the commission of cheating and financial fraud and, on the basis of the said allegations, offences under Sections 317(2), 317(5), and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), have been registered against the applicant. Hence, the present anticipatory bail application.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegation in the complaint is only with regard to the fact that, by cheating the complainant, applicant asked him to deposit an amount of Rs. 7,520/-, and there is no other allegation. He also submits that the account which is the subject matter of the complaint and forms part of the order which the police relies upon during the course of investigation is not being operated by the applicant, but by Raju Mandal. There is an inordinate delay in registration of the FIR.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission and submits that, from the impugned order, it is clear that during the investigation, on 06.10.2025, the police found that a sum of Rs. 1,34,23,390/- was deposited in the bank account within a period of less than three months. The custodial interrogation of the applicant is required in the facts of the case.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of the allegations, and further considering that the police have started enquiring into the complaint dated 06.10.2026 and, after finding that in the account, registered in the name of the applicant, there was a huge deposit of Rs. 1,34,23,390/- within a period of less than three months, FIR is registered, I do not find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is dismissed. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu)

JUDGE Saurabh