Lagith Ganesh v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station

: Mr. Maaroof, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board

27.10.2025

1. 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. 27/2025 registered at Police Station – Geedam District – South Bastar Dantewada (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 111(1)(3) of the BNS and Section 66(d) of the I.T. Act.

2. The prosecution case in short is that, the de facto complainant 2 received WhatsApp/Telegram messages offering online jobs promising returns of Rs.1200 to Rs.6000 per day. Acting on such inducements, he initially transferred Rs. 10,000 and was shown some "profit." Thereafter, he was repeatedly asked to transfer further sums to various accounts under the pretext of investment/profit and later, to deposit "charges" for withdrawing the so-called profit. Upon realizing the deception, the complainant lodged a report on the basis of which the FIR was registered.

3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is neither named in the FIR nor is there any credible evidence linking him with the alleged offences, rather, he himself has been a victim of similar cyber fraud. The only allegation discernible from Annexure A/1 is that the applicant allegedly assisted co-accused Mr. Lagith Ganesh in opening a bank account wherein the alleged fraud amount was deposited. The applicant and the said co-accused are known to each other as they belong to the same place; however, mere acquaintance cannot be construed as criminal involvement. The applicant has never communicated with the complainant with any intention to cheat, nor has he derived any benefit from the alleged offence. There is no direct or indirect nexus between the applicant and the complainant. He further submits that in the present case, three other co-accused have already been granted bail by the Trial Court, and the main accused, Mrs. Vaishali Padale, has also been granted bail by the Hon’ble High Court on 30/07/2025 in MCRC No. 4291/2025. The applicant belongs to a very poor family, and his prolonged incarceration is causing severe financial hardship to his dependents. The applicant has been in continuous judicial custody since 3 30/07/2025. Therefore, he prays that regular bail may kindly be granted to the applicant.

4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court in the present case. He further submits that, in compliance with this Hon’ble Court’s order dated 11.09.2025, the Investigating Officer of the aforesaid case has submitted an affidavit stating that an FIR was registered at Police Station Geedam, District South Bastar Dantewada (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 111(1)(3) of the BNS and Section 66(d) of the I.T. Act. Based on this, the police commenced an investigation on the basis of the complaint, and through the Cyber Police Portal, the money trail of the fraudulent transactions was examined. During the investigation, it was found that the cheated amount had been transferred through multiple bank accounts, and several persons, namely Abu Talha Abdul Ali, Shishupal @ Neta, Noor Mohammad Khan, Pemparam, and Jithin M.T., were arrested, each having played different roles in the commission of the offence. It was further revealed that a large number of transactions had taken place in Account No. 13060100260875 of the Federal Bank, Kozhikode, Kerala, belonging to one Lagith Ganesh. On the basis of his memorandum statement, the memorandum of the present applicant, Muneer U.P., was also recorded, in which he admitted that, on the allurement of one Miras, who was working as a supervisor at Hotel Hamgrihak, he had opened a bank account that was later used for receiving money obtained through cyber fraud. It is also submitted that a mobile phone was seized during the investigation, which contained WhatsApp chats between the present applicant and other persons regarding account details and the modus operandi of the fraudulent transactions. Therefore, considering the gravity of the offence and the applicant’s active role revealed during the investigation, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused 4 the case diary.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the present applicant, and also taking into account that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, and that three co-accused persons, namely Jitendra Mairotha, Abhishek Gupta, and Biram Ram Nayak, have already been granted bail by the Trial Court, while one co-accused, namely Vaishali Padale, has been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 4291 of 2025 vide order dated

30.07.2025, and further considering that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, the applicant has been in judicial custody since 30.07.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some more time, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case.

7. Let the Applicant – Lagith Ganesh, involved in Crime No. 27/2025 registered at Police Station – Geedam District – South Bastar Dantewada (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 111(1)(3) of the BNS and Section 66(d) of the I.T. Act, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two local 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 5 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.

8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - vaibhav SdSd/-/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice