RAHUL PRAKASH KAMDI vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010335772026 2026:CGHC:45240
NAFR
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally
signed by
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
MCRC No. 8051 of 2026
1 - Rahul Prakash Kamdi S/o Prakash Bhagwan Kamdi Aged About 38
Years R/o 139, Tajeshwar Nagar, Hondkeshwar Road, Hondkeshwar,
Nagpur, District- Nagpur (Maharashtra)
2 - Gaurav Ramakant Mishra S/o Ramakant Gaya Prasad Mishra Aged
About 27 Years R/o Near Hanuman Mandir, Basant Nagar, Old Babool
Kheda, Bhagwan Nagar, Nagpur, District- Nagpur (Maharashtra)
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Incharge, Cyber Range, Bilaspur,
District- Bilaspur (C.G.)
... Non-Applicant(s)
For Applicants : Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate.
For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. K.S. Saini, Dy. Govt. Advocate.
Hon'ble Mr. Rakesh Mohan Pandey, Judge
Order on Board
27/10/2026
1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under
Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for
grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with
Crime No. 02/2026, registered at Police Station Cyber Range,
Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under

2
Sections 308(6), 318(4) and 3(5) of the BNS and Sections 66(C)
and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act.
2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 28.04.2026, the
complainant Prashant Shrivastava lodged a report alleging that his
mother was subjected to a digital arrest by unknown persons
through WhatsApp video and voice calls, who impersonated officials
of investigating agencies and threatened her with arrest on false
allegations of funding terrorist organisations. The accused persons
allegedly sent forged documents purportedly issued by the RBI and
other authorities and by creating fear of legal action, induced her to
transfer an amount of Rs. 1,04,80,000/- into different bank
accounts. During investigation, the involvement of the present
applicants allegedly surfaced in the financial transactions and
routing of the defrauded amount, whereupon they were implicated
in the present case.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants
are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case.
He would further submit that the applicants neither contacted nor
threatened the complainant or his mother and no communication
connecting them with the alleged digital arrest has been
established. He would further submit that similarly situated co-
accused Rupendra Singh, whose bail application was rejected by a
Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in MCRC No. 5943/2026,
subsequently approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing SLP
(Criminal) No. 16397/2026, wherein he was granted bail. It is

3
contended that the case of the present applicants stands on a better
footing than that of the said co-accused and therefore, they are also
entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the prayer
for grant of bail and submit that the applicants are involved in a
serious and organised cyber fraud involving an amount of Rs.
1,04,80,000/-, which was allegedly obtained by subjecting the
complainant's mother to a digital arrest. The material collected
during investigation prima facie indicates their involvement in the
financial transactions and routing of the defrauded amount.
However, learned State counsel could not dispute the fact that co-
accused Rupendra Singh has already been granted bail by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court.
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused
the case diary as well as the material available on record.
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, nature
and gravity of the offences alleged against the applicants, the fact
that similarly situated co-accused Rupendra Singh, whose bail
application was earlier rejected by a Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court in MCRC No. 5943/2026, subsequently approached the
Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing SLP (Criminal) No. 16397/2026
and was granted bail, coupled with the submission that the case of
the present applicants stands on a better footing than that of the
said co-accused and further considering that the charge-sheet has
already been filed, this Court, without further commenting upon the

4
merits of the case, is inclined to grant bail to the applicants on the
ground of parity.
7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants is allowed . It is
directed that in the event of the applicants executing a personal
bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety each in the like sum
to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, they shall be
released on bail on the following conditions:-
(i) they shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade them from disclosing such fact to the Court;
(ii) they shall not act in any manner which will be
prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, &
(iii) they shall appear before the trial Court on each
and every date given to them by the said Court till
disposal of the trial.
- S/- Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
Judge
Kunal