DAITARI DEEP vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010314832026 2026:CGHC:38328
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 7873 of 2026
Daitari Deep S/o Shri Damjee Deep Aged About 33 Years R/o Chota Ashok
Nagar, In Front Of Chain Kirana Store, Ram Krishna Paramhans Ward No. 02
Digitally
signed by
PREETI
KUMARI
Date:
2026.09.01
16:17:57
+0530
PREETI
KUMARI
Raipur, Chhattisgarh
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through - S.H.O. P.S. Azad Chowk, District Raipur
Chhattisgarh
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Karan Kumar Baharani, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Deputy Government Advocate.
Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
31.08.2026
1. This is the Second bail application filed under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the
applicant who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 283/2025
registered at Police Station : Azad Chowk, District- Raipur, C.G. for the
offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5)
of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. Earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide
order dated 10.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 4502/2026.

2
3. As per the case of the prosecution, in brief, the Government of India,
Ministry of Home Affairs, has established the National Cyber Crime
Reporting Portal for reporting cyber frauds committed across the country.
During scrutiny of the information received through the said portal, it came
to the notice of the Cyber Range, Raipur, that 17 bank accounts opened
with South Indian Bank, Ramsagar Para Branch, Raipur, were allegedly
being used for receiving the proceeds of cyber fraud. On the basis of the
information received from Police Headquarters, Raipur, Crime No.
283/2025 was registered against the account holders for the offences
punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5) of the
BNS, and investigation was commenced. During the course of
investigation, it was found that a sum of Rs.2,11,10,263/- obtained
through cyber fraud had been credited into the bank account of
co-accused Santosh Kumar, bearing Account No. 0433053000007320,
maintained with South Indian Bank. It is further alleged that, on the basis
of the memorandum statement of co-accused Karan Singh, the
involvement of the present applicant surfaced, whereupon he was
arrested. The investigation further revealed that the present applicant, in
connivance with the other co-accused persons, had facilitated the
opening and use of as many as 17 bank accounts for receiving the
proceeds of cyber fraud. It is also alleged that the bank account of
co-accused Santosh Kumar had been sold to him by the present
applicant and that the said account was used for routing cyber fraud
proceeds amounting to Rs.2,11,10,263/-. It is further alleged that co-
accused Karan Singh had also sold his bank account to the present
applicant, into which an amount of Rs.46,61,115/- obtained through cyber
fraud was credited. After completion of the investigation, a supplementary
charge-sheet has been filed against the present applicant before the

3
competent Court.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the first bail
application which was rejected by this Court vide order dated 10.07.2026
passed in MCRC No. 4502/2026 on merits. He also submits that the
co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court vide
order dated 26.02.2026, 16.06.2026, 10.07.2026 passed in MCRC Nos.
613/2026, 1275/2026, 1086/2026, 3184/2026, 4000/2026 and
5104/2026, further the applicant is in jail since 21.12.2025 and the
applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, therefore, the trial is likely
to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays that the
applicant to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.
5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and
submits that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected on
merits on the ground that there is sufficient material available on record to
prima-facie establish the involvement of the present applicant in the
alleged offence. He further submits that during the course of investigation,
it was revealed that as many as 17 bank accounts were opened and
utilized for receiving the proceeds of cyber fraud and the complicity of the
present applicant surfaced during investigation. It is further submitted that
the supplementary charge-sheet has already been filed against the
applicant. He also submits that although co-accused Narayan Kosariya
and Gopi Verma have been granted bail by this Court but the case of the
present applicant stands on a different footing, as his role is distinct and
supported by the material collected during investigation. Considering the
nature and gravity of the offence involving large-scale cyber fraud and the
specific role attributed to the applicant, he prays for rejection of the bail
application.

4
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material
available on record.
7. On a pointed query being made by this Court with regard to the present
status of the trial, learned counsel for the applicant submits that no order-
sheets of the trial Court have been annexed along with the present bail
application to indicate the present stage of the trial.
8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,
particularly the fact that the first bail application of the applicant was
rejected by this Court order dated 10.07.2026 passed in MCRC No.
4502/2026 on the ground that the specific role attributed to the present
applicant, as emerging from the investigation and the affidavit of the
Investigating Officer, is qualitatively different and distinguishes his case
from that of the aforesaid co-accused who have been granted bail by this
Court, so far as the status of the trial is concerned, learned counsel for
the applicant submits that no order-sheets of the trial Court have been
annexed along with the present bail application to indicate the present
stage of the trial, in view of the nature of the allegations, the applicant's
prima-facie involvement, the reasons recorded while rejecting the earlier
bail application, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case for grant
of regular bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application deserves
to be and is hereby rejected.
9. Accordingly, the second bail application of applicant – Daitari Deep
involved in Crime No. 283/2025 registered at Police Station : Azad
Chowk, District- Raipur, C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections
317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.,
rejected at this stage.
10. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and
conclude the trial expeditiously.

5
11. The Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinh a)
Chief Justice
Preeti