1 2025:CGHC:23856 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4470 of 2025 1. Umesh Kumar S/o Sant Ram Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Heerapur, Police Station And District Balod (C.G.) 2. Jitendra Kumar S/o Shanta Ram Gavade Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Harrathema, Police Station- Balod, District Balod (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Balod, District Balod (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Punit Ruparel, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 13.06 .202 5 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No - 60/2025, registered at Police Station – Balod, District Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318(4), 61(2)(A) and 111of PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.06.13 19:47:19 +0530 2 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the case of prosecution, the Mule Account Holders is inspected by the coordination portal operated by Home Ministry of Government of India then it reveal that on 01.01.2024 to 02.2.2025 in the account of Madhya Bank of Maharasthra Account No. 6045847643, 60461334689, 60479046363, 604682131, 60487722479, 60488052150, 60489068158, 60490433957 and 60491085465 by committing fraud by different places of States there is several withdrawal has been made cyber fraud sum of Rs. 3,19,145/- in total 10 accounts, upon such information the aforesaid FIR has been registered and the applicants are arrested, after due investigation filed the charge-sheet before the competent court as mentioned above and trial is pending against the present applicants. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that there is no money has been deposited or transfer in the account of applicants and applicants have no connection with the aforesaid crime. He further submits that the co-accused persons, namely, Khilendra Raipuriya, Praveen Shrivastav, Satnamm Singh, Rahul Kumar Malekar, Himanshu Ishrani and Utkarsh Gupta have already been granted bail by the Court in vide order dated 09.05.2025, 20.05.2025, 13.05.2025, 20.05.2025, 20.05.2025, 27.05.2025 passed in MCRC Nos. 3567/2025, 3975/2025, 3780/2025, 3985/2025, 3903/2025 and 4075/2025. It is further submitted that the applicants have no previous criminal antecedents. He also submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicants are in jail since 29.01.2025 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays grant of 3 bail to the applicants on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicants but could not dispute the fact that the co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court and the case of the present applicants are identical to that of the co-accused person. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicants and the fact that the that the co-accused persons, namely, Khilendra Raipuriya, Praveen Shrivastav, Satnamm Singh, Rahul Kumar Malekar, Himanshu Ishrani and Utkarsh Gupta have already been granted bail by the Court in vide order dated 09.05.2025, 20.05.2025, 13.05.2025, 20.05.2025, 20.05.2025 and 27.05.2025 passed in MCRC Nos. 3567/2025, 3975/2025, 3780/2025, 3985/2025, 3903/2025 and 4075/2025 respectively, further the applicants have no previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been filed against the applicants, the applicants are in jail since 29.01.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Nos. 1 and 2 - Umesh Kumar and Jitendra Kumar respectively, involved in Crime No - 60/2025, registered at Police Station – Balod, District Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318(4), 61(2) (A) and 111of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to 4 the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants 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 applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their 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 applicants 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 thems in accordance with law. 5 8. 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 Preeti