Chhattisgarh HC Grants Bail To Two Accused In Cyber-Fraud Mule-Account Case, Citing Filed Charge-Sheet, No Antecedents And Trial Delay

Police registered Crime No. 388/2026 at Police Station Bhilai Nagar, District Durg, after receiving information from the Ministry of Home Affairs that the applicants’ bank accounts were allegedly being used as layer-1 or “mule” accounts in cyber fraud. The applicants were arrested on 28 July 2026 for offences under Sections 318(2), 318(3), 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The applicants submitted that they lacked knowledge of the fraud, that the accounts had been used in transactions of Rs. 37,900 and Rs. 63,850, and that they were willing to deposit those amounts. They also relied on the filing of the charge-sheet, their custody since 28 July 2026, and the likely duration of the trial.

The State opposed bail, alleging that the applicants had provided their accounts to fraudsters for a commission of Rs. 4,200.

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, was the statutory basis for the applications for regular bail.

The applicants were charged under Sections 318(2), 318(3), 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

In deciding bail, the Court considered the nature and gravity of the allegations, the applicants’ lack of criminal antecedents, the filing of the charge-sheet, the period of judicial custody, and the likely time required to conclude the trial.

No precedent was cited.

The Court considered both the allegation that the applicants supplied their bank accounts for commission and their submission that they did not know the accounts were being used for fraud.

It concluded that bail was appropriate, taking account of the applicants’ lack of criminal antecedents, the completed investigation and filed charge-sheet, their custody since 28 July 2026, and the likelihood of delay before trial conclusion.

It did not determine the applicants’ guilt or resolve the competing accounts of their knowledge and involvement; it expressly confined its observations to the bail applications.

The applicants must be available for police interrogation when required, must not threaten or induce persons acquainted with the case, and must not act prejudicially to a fair and expeditious trial.

The trial Court is to decide the case on its own merits.