Jatin Asi Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh

This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 649/2025 registered at Police Station– Ambikapur Dehat (Gandhinagar), District- Surguja (Ambikapur), (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 317(4), 111 and 61(2) of ^{RAHULDEWANGAN} the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

According to the prosecution case, in brief, the complainant, Sujeet Mandal, is running a CSC Centre in the name of “Kali Mai Choice Centre” at Sakalo. It is alleged that on 01.11.2025, co-accused Anish Giri came to his shop and represented that, as his own bank account was not functioning, his employer would transfer money into the complainant’s account. Thereafter, an amount of Rs.99,999/- was transferred through the complainant’s QR code from the IDBI Bank account of one Gurmeet Singh. The complainant allegedly handed over Rs.40,000/- in cash to Anish Giri and, through his staff member, facilitated withdrawal of the remaining Rs.60,000/- from an ATM, after deducting Rs.800/- as commission. Subsequently, the complainant came to know that the amount was allegedly connected with a fraudulent transaction and that Gurmeet Singh had reported the fraudulent withdrawal from his bank account. During investigation, co-accused Anish Giri, Varsha Singh and Saddam Alam were arrested and charge-sheeted, and thereafter the present applicant Jatin Asi Yadav, along with other co-accused, was arrested and a supplementary charge-sheet was filed against him. The prosecution alleges that the accused persons were involved in cyber fraud by routing the fraudulently obtained amounts through mule bank accounts, withdrawing the same and sharing the proceeds, while certain co-accused persons allegedly provided their bank accounts on commission for receiving such fraudulent amounts. On these allegations, Crime No. 649/2025 was registered at Police Station Gandhinagar for the said offences against the present applicant along with co-accused.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated, as there is no specific allegation or overt act attributed to him in the original complaint/FIR. It is submitted that the complainant has neither alleged that the applicant visited his CSC Centre, made any representation or inducement to him, nor received any part of the alleged amount, and the alleged inducement and receipt of cash are attributed to co-accused Anish Giri. The applicant has no connection with the original transaction of Rs.99,999/- between the account of Gurmeet Singh and that of the complainant, and his name surfaced only during the course of investigation, primarily on the basis of statements/memorandums of co-accused persons and alleged bank transactions. It is further submitted that the applicant had provided his bank account/QR code and ATM facility on the representation of co-accused persons regarding transfer of money on commission, without knowledge of its alleged fraudulent source, and there is no specific material showing his prior knowledge or criminal intention. He would further submit that no Test Identification Parade was conducted and the complainant has never identified the applicant as the person who visited his shop or participated in the alleged inducement. He also submits that the applicant is aged about 18 years, has no criminal antecedents. Investigation is complete and Supplementary Charge-Sheet No. 27-B/2026 dated 19.07.2026 has already been filed against him. It is also submitted that one of the co-accused, who is a juvenile, has already been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CRR No. 774/2026 vide order dated 29.06.2026. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of parity.

On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court. He further submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature and relate to a cyber-fraud racket wherein fraudulently obtained amounts were routed through mule bank accounts, withdrawn and thereafter shared amongst the accused persons. It is submitted that the role of the present applicant surfaced during investigation and the material collected, including the statements/memorandums of the co-accused and the relevant bank transactions, prima facie connects him with the alleged offence. He would further submit that, though one of the co-accused, being a juvenile, has been granted bail in CRR No. 774/2026 vide order dated 29.06.2026, the said order was passed considering his status as a juvenile and the material contained in his memorandum statement, and therefore, the same cannot be claimed as a matter of parity by the present applicant. It is further submitted that the bail applications of co-accused persons namely, Anish Giri, Varsha Singh, Kshitij Singh, Anup Kumar Chaubey and Shivam Painkra have already been rejected by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 20.04.2026 and 31.08.2026 in MCRC Nos. 1387/2026, 2165/2026, 7421/2026, 7751/2026, and 7452/2026 respectively. Hence, the applicant is also not entitled to be released on bail.

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

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the allegations and the material collected during investigation, and further the fact that the role of the applicant cannot be ignored at this stage, the applicant is alleged to have provided his bank account, QR code and ATM facility for receiving and withdrawing the amount allegedly obtained through cyber fraud and, thereafter, sharing the proceeds with the other accused persons. Though one of the co-accused, who is a juvenile, has been granted bail in CRR No. 774/2026 vide order dated 29.06.2026, the said bail was granted considering his status as a juvenile, and therefore, the applicant cannot claim parity with him. It is also relevant that the bail applications of co-accused persons namely, Anish Giri, Varsha Singh, Kshitij Singh, Anup Kumar Chaubey and Shivam Painkra have already been rejected by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 20.04.2026 and 31.08.2026 in MCRC Nos. 1387/2026, 2165/2026, 7421/2026, 7751/2026, and 7452/2026 respectively. Considering the nature of the allegations and the material available against the applicant, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Jatin Asi Yadav, involved in Crime No. 649/2025 registered at Police Station– Ambikapur Dehat (Gandhinagar), District- Surguja (Ambikapur), (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 317(4), 111 and 61(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected.

Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously.

Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.