[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Kajal Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 10 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:11477
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2143 of 2026
Kajal Yadav D/o Rajaram Yadav Aged About 23 Years R/o Near
Lathiyari, Temple Birgaon, Thana- Urla Raipur, District- Raipur,
Chhattisgarh. (As Per Correct Details)
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, City Kotwali,
Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
... Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s) : Mr. Gajanand, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Vaishali Mahilang, Dy. G.A.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
10/03/2026
1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail
to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime
No. 45/2025 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Raipur,
District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections
317(2), 317(4), 317(5) and 111 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for
short 'BNS').
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that during an investigation
conducted on the basis of a government letter regarding the use
of mule bank accounts for converting illegal money into legal
money through banking transactions during the period from
01.01.2024 to 11.01.2025, the bank account of the present
applicant was also identified along with the accounts of other co-
accused persons. On the basis of the said information, an FIR
was lodged against the present applicant. Hence, the present
application.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first bail
application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on merits
vide order dated 11.12.2025 in MCRC No.10230 of 2025,
therefore this second bail application is filed on the ground that
identically situated co-accused, Bhavika Harchandani and Ayush
Jethani have already been granted bail by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in SLP (Crl.) No. 19243/2025 and SLP (Crl.) No.
20651/2025 respectively and thereafter on the basis of the same,
co-accused, Nitish Kumar has been granted bail by this Court vide
order dated 29.01.2026 in MCRC No.884 of 2026, further charge-
sheet has already been filed in the present case and the applicant
is in jail since 13.05.2025, hence, he prays for releasing the
applicant on regular bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail
application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in
the present case. She further submits that the allegation against
present applicant is that his bank account was used as a mule
account for transactions of illegal money, whereby illegal funds
were routed through his account along with the accounts of other
co-accused persons for converting such money into legal money,
therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and
perused the case diary.
6. From perusal of the records, it transpires that this is the second
bail application of the applicant and first bail application of the
applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 11.12.2025
in MCRC No. 10230 of 2025 by considering the serious nature of
the offence of cyber fraud involving mule accounts, the prima
facie involvement of the applicant along with co-accused persons,
and the fact that bail applications of other co-accused persons
(including a lady accused) had already been rejected by the Court
earlier, but considering the fact that identically situated co-
accused, Bhavika Harchandani and Ayush Jethani have already
been granted bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No.
19243/2025 and SLP (Crl.) No. 20651/2025 respectively and
thereafter on the basis of the same, co-accused, Nitish Kumar has
been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 29.01.2026 in
MCRC No.884 of 2026, further the charge-sheet has been filed,
as such, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be
released on bail in this case.
7. Accordingly, the application is allowed.
8. Let the Applicant-Kajal Yadav, involved in Crime No. 45/2025
registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Raipur, District- Raipur
(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4),
317(5) and 111 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, be released on bail
on her furnishing a 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 she 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 her counsel. In case of her absence,
without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed
against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail
during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, 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 her in accordance with law.
9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court for necessary information and compliance.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
CHIEF JUSTICE
Akhil
