ORDER : 1. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr.Nirupam D. Nanavaty with learned advocate Mr.Malav Mulani appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.L.B.Dabhi appearing on behalf of the respondent-State. 2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent-State. 3. The applicant has filed this application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for enlarging the applicant on Regular Bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11210062250052/2025 registered with Cybercrime Police Station, Surat City for the offence punishable under Sections 391(2), 318(4), 336(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 66(D) of the IT Act. 4. Learned Senior Advocate Mr.Nanavaty for the applicant would submit that the present FIR is lodged at the instance of a police official and the allegation being that the accused had indulged in the activity of laundering money and whereas, it is submitted that except bare allegation there is no material against the accused insofar as the charge-sheet is concerned. In any case, learned Senior Advocate would submit that the present applicant was an employee of the main accused and whereas, the applicant receiving an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as per the charge-sheet and as per the affidavit of the investigating officer, the present applicant not having any role in the principal conspiracy, this Court may consider and release the present applicant on regular bail. 5. The present application has been vehemently objected to by learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.L.B.Dabhi appearing on behalf of the respondent – State who would submit that as such, it appears that the aspect of present applicant being an employee insofar as the activity is concerned, appears to be based upon the statement of the present applicant himself. It is submitted by learned APP Mr.Dabhi that the investigation has revealed that the accused, in connivance with each other, had laundered money to the tune of approximately Rs.800crores and whereas, it appears that the present applicant was dealing with around 147 bank accounts. It is submitted that as against the 147 accounts, a total of 402 complaints have been registered from all over the country. It is submitted that as against the 147 accounts, a total of 402 complaints have been registered from all over the country. Learned APP would submit that some part of the amount being proceeds of the money obtained through gaming portals and some part of the money being part of the proceeds of cyber crime and whereas, the present applicant being involved in laundering the amount through the medium of mule accounts, this Court considering the seriousness of the offence and considering that the enormous sum of money involved, may not release the present applicant on regular bail. 6. Having heard learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned APP for the respondent-State and having perusing the documents on record, this Court is disinclined to consider this application for the following reasons:- i. The fact of the present applicant being involved in the activity of money laundering being prima facie made out more particularly, it appears that the mobile phone of the present applicant which had been seized during the investigation revealing that the present applicant was operating a merchant fund account as an administrator and having the details of platform namely LeoPay.live. It also appears that the entire amount involved i.e. the amount which was laundered through the medium of mule accounts being enormous i.e. running into around Rs.800 crores. The fact of the part of the amount being proceeds of the money obtained through gaming platforms and whereas, it would appear that some part of the amount was part of the proceeds of cyber crime. ii. While around 147 mule accounts had been used to launder money in question, the fact of a total of 402 complaints received in the National Cyber Crime Portal against the accounts in question clearly revealing that the amount would have been prima facie part of the proceeds of the cyber crime. iii. While it is attempted to be stated that the present applicant was just a small pawn in the entire conspiracy and whereas, he was earning an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as a salary, yet, it would appear that the same prima facie appears to be a facade more particularly it appears that the accused in connivance with each other were doing this activity. iv. iv. As having pointed out by learned APP, it also prima facie appears that the aspect of getting salary of a lakh of rupees was, as per the statement of the present applicant himself and whereas, the fact of the present applicant receiving a salary of Rs.1,00,000/- does not appear to be supported, more particularly, since there does not appearing to be any employer whom the present applicant was reporting. It also appears in this regard that the conspiracy may have been the brainchild of the present applicant more particularly as per the statement of one of the principal accused in the charge-sheet i.e. accused no.1 – Meet Shah who had inter alia revealed that approximately two years before the arrest of the parties, the said Meet Shah had met the present applicant in Goa and whereas, the present applicant, at that time, revealing that he was involved in the business of transferring gaming funds of one Winbuzz and whereas, he had offered the accused Meet Shah to join him in doing the business in question. While it appears that there may or may not have been follow-up with regard to offer in question, yet, the fact of the present applicant being involved in the business prima facie comes out more particularly the involvement of the present applicant dating back to approximately two years back before his arrest. v. While learned Senior Advocate would submit that there are no victims of the cyber crime, yet, the fact of around 402 complaints being received in the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal belies the submission that there are no victims. Further, while it is submitted that all what has been relied upon in the charge-sheet are based upon the statement of the co-accused, yet, it would appear that the fact of the present applicant being part of the conspiracy, whereby the entire money having been laundered and the present applicant being administrator of certain online platforms etc. clearly coming out from the investigating, to this Court, it would appear that there is enough material whereby the prima facie involvement of the present applicant is coming out. 7. clearly coming out from the investigating, to this Court, it would appear that there is enough material whereby the prima facie involvement of the present applicant is coming out. 7. Having considered the issue in overall perspective, more particularly, having regard to the fact that the present applicant was involved in crime more particularly where an enormous amount i.e. more than Rs.800 crores had been laundered using around 147 mule accounts and whereas, some part of the money also being proceeds of cyber crimes and whereas, the country at present reeling under the onslaught of cyber crimes, to this Court, it would appear that the present offence is very serious and whereas, the role of the present applicant coming out very clearly, though the offences are, as having been submitted by learned Senior Advocate Mr.Nanavaty, all magistrate triable offence, yet, at this stage, this Court is disinclined to consider this application. 8. Having regard to the fact that the present applicant is facing charges of offences which are magistrate triable and since this Court has rejected the application for being enlarged on regular bail, the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial insofar as the present FIR is concerned, so as to ensure that the same is completed by 31.01.2027. 9. With these observations and directions, the present application stands disposed of as rejected. Rule is discharged. Direct service is permitted.