[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Rajesh Sonkar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 20 April, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:17912
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 3567 of 2026
Rajesh Sonkar S/o Shri Raju Sonkar Aged About 25 Years R/o Mungeli,
Ambedkar Ward No. 13, Police Station- Mungeli, District- Mungeli (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Through Police
Station- Balrampur, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate
For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Dy. Govt. Advocate.
Digitally signed
by ABHISHEK
SHRIVAS
ABHISHEK
SHRIVAS Date:
2026.04.21
11:35:38
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
+0530
Order on Board
20.04.2026
1.
This is the Second 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. 40/2025 registered
at Police Station - Balrampur, District - Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.),
for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 318(4),
61(2)(a), 338, 339, 340, 341 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 5917 of
2025 was rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated 13.08.2025.
3. The case of the prosecution is that, by a letter issued by the
Superintendent of Police, Balrampur, to Police Station Balrampur,
District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.), information was conveyed
regarding the opening of mule accounts in certain commercial banks in
the names of different persons. The aforesaid bank accounts were
inquired into through the Cyber Crime Coordination Centre portal under
the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. During the said inquiry
conducted by the Cyber Cell, it was found that within the jurisdiction of
Police Station Balrampur, an account bearing No. 1427018440898043 in
Utkarsh Small Finance Bank, Branch Balrampur, held in the name of
Shoaib Khan, along with his associates, was allegedly used as a mule
account. It is alleged that the account holders entered into a criminal
conspiracy and derived monetary benefits. It is further alleged that the
aforesaid accounts were used as mule accounts for transferring,
withdrawing, and laundering the proceeds of cyber crime. Upon
investigation, it was found that such accounts were held in the names of
multiple individuals, including the present applicant, along with other co-
accused persons. The Cyber Crime Coordination Centre portal reflected
a total fraud amount of Rs. 8,22,146/- in relation to the illegal transactions
carried out through the said mule accounts.
4. On the basis of the said information, Police Station Balrampur, District
Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.), registered an FIR against Shoaib Khan,
and during the course of investigation, other co-accused persons,
including the present applicant, were implicated on the basis of
memoranda of co-accused persons. The present applicant does not hold
any such mule account. However, it is alleged by the complainant that
the applicant, along with other co-accused persons, committed the
offence of cheating through transactions in other accounts. Accordingly,
the police registered an offence punishable under Sections 317(2),
317(4), 317(5), 318(4), 61(2)(a), 338, 339, 340, and 341 of the B.N.S.
against the applicant along with other accused persons in Crime No.
40/2025, on the basis of the complainant's report. Hence, it is alleged
that the applicant has committed the offence of cheating.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is
innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case.
He further submits that the second bail application of the other co-
accused person, namely, Abhishek Jaiswal, has already been granted
regular bail by this Court vide order dated 10.04.2026 in MCRC No. 3251
of 2026. Therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on regular
bail on the ground of parity.
6. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of
the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the
present case.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that
the second bail application of the other co-accused person, namely,
Abhishek Jaiswal, has already been granted regular bail by this Court
vide order dated 10.04.2026 in MCRC No. 3251 of 2026. Also
considering the fact that the charge - sheet has already been submitted
in the present case before the competent Court and the applicant has
been in jail since 23.04.2025 and conclusion of the trial may takes some
more time. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is
entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity.
9. Let the Second Bail of the Applicant - Rajesh Sonkar, involved in Crime
No. 40/2025 registered at Police Station - Balrampur, District -
Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.), for the offence punishable under
Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 318(4), 61(2)(a), 338, 339, 340, 341 of
the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing
personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of
the Court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that
he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for
evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case
of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial
court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders
in accordance with law.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial
court on each date fixed, either personally or through his
counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause,
the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269
of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during
trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation
under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant
fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such
proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate
proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under
Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before
the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case,
(ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement
under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial
court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without
sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to
treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed
against him in accordance with law.
10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court
concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
- Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Abhishek
