Sharat @ Sharad Haldar & Anr. vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Hon'ble Shri. Rakesh Mohan Pandey, Judge

Since the above two bail applications are arising out of same crime number, same police station and same offences so they are being heard and decided by this common order.

The applicants have preferred these First Bail Applications under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.315/2026, registered at Police Station Gandhinagar, District: Sarguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 317(4) and 3(5) of BNS.

Prosecution story, in brief, is that during the course of cyber crime investigation, a suspicious bank account bearing No. 60504614570, maintained with Maharashtra Bank in the name of applicant Sharad Haldar, came to the notice of the Cyber Cell. The account was linked with mobile number 8827530393, allegedly provided by co-applicant Raja Haldar. As per the cyber complaint acknowledgment No. 237112400xxxxx, an amount of Rs. 95,000/-allegedly obtained through cyber fraud was transferred into the said bank account. Other cyber complaints were also found linked with the same account, indicating suspicious transactions.

During investigation, applicant Sharad Haldar allegedly disclosed that he had opened the said bank account and handed over its passbook and SIM card to co-accused Jai Gupta in consideration of Rs. 2,000/-. It is further alleged that co-applicant Raja Haldar had provided his SIM card and bank account details to Jai Gupta in consideration of Rs. 5,000/-, and his mobile number was linked with the bank account of Sharad Haldar. On the basis of the aforesaid material, both applicants were implicated in the present crime.

Learned counsel appearing for applicant Sharad @ Sharad Haldar would submit that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Though the bank account stood in his name, it is submitted that he had handed over the account and related documents to co-accused Jai Gupta for consideration of Rs. 2,000/-. He would further submit that the applicant had approached the bank authorities for closure of his account, but no steps were taken. It is also contended that the applicant is not the beneficiary of the alleged fraudulent transactions, the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 28.05.2026 and the applicant has no criminal antecedent and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time therefore, he prays for grant of bail.

Learned counsel appearing for applicant Raja Haldar would submit that he has been implicated merely because his SIM card was allegedly linked with the bank account of co-applicant Sharad Haldar. He would further submit that the applicant had allegedly handed over his SIM card and bank account details to co-accused Jai Gupta for monetary consideration and is not the beneficiary of the alleged transactions. The charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, the applicant is in jail since 28.05.2026 and he has no criminal antecedents and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, he prays for grant of bail to both applicant.

On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the prayer for grant of bail and submit that the applicants are involved in an organised cyber fraud. It is contended that several complaints from different States disclosed fraudulent transactions through the bank account of applicant Sharad Haldar, which was allegedly linked with the SIM card of applicant Raja Haldar. Accordingly, he prays for rejection of the bail application.

I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary and the material available on record.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, respective roles attributed to the applicants, the fact that applicant Sharad Haldar allegedly handed over his bank account and passbook to co-accused Jai Gupta in consideration of Rs. 2,000/-, whereas applicant Raja Haldar allegedly provided his SIM card and bank account details to co-accused Jai Gupta in consideration of Rs. 5,000/-, and considering that co-accused Jai Gupta is alleged to be the main accused, the roles attributed to the present applicants are distinguishable from that of co-accused Jai Gupta. Further, the charge-sheet has been filed, the applicants are in jail since 28.05.2026, they have no criminal antecedents and the conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude thus, without further commenting upon the merits of the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicants.

Accordingly, the bail applications of the applicants are 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:-