1 2025:CGHC:54857 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8860 of 2025 Gujjala Jagdish Kumar S/o Late Kameshwar Rao Aged About 30 Years R/o Ward No. 37, Mohan Building, Shankar Nagar, Bilaspur, Tah. And Dist.- Bilaspur, C.G. 495001 ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through-SHO. P.S. Cyber Range - Bilaspur, Distt.- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 11.11.2025 1. This is the second bail application <led 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. 08/2025 registered at Police Station - Cyber Range-Bilaspur, District & Revenue District - Bilaspur (C.G.) for the o>ences punishable under Sections 61, 317(5), 318(4), 111(3)(4) and 323 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The <rst bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated 12.06.2025 passed in MCRC No. 4200/2025. 3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on the basis of information received from the Samanvaya Portal operated by the Government of ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.11.12 18:24:13 +0530 2 India, and from various banks and police headquarters, it was found during investigation that the users and account holders of several banks, namely UCO Bank, ICICI Bank, Kotak Mahindra Bank, State Bank of India, Bandhan Bank, Bank of Baroda, and other banks, in conspiracy, fraudulently transferred money from the accounts of innocent account holders without their consent by luring them. They allegedly enticed the victims through online games, share trading, and online job o>ers, and collected a total amount of Rs. 97,83,492/- in 82 di>erent mule accounts. The applicant was arrested by the police on 13.02.2025. The matter is presently under trial, and the charge-sheet has been <led. 4. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that this is the second bail application of the applicant. It is further submitted that the co-accused, Shekhar Chaturthi who is similarly situated with respect to the allegations and the nature of the o>ence, has been enlarged on bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) Nos. 10726 of 2025, vide order dated 16.09.2025. The principle of parity in bail is a well- established legal position, whereby similarly placed accused persons should ordinarily be treated alike, unless there exists a material distinction justifying di>erential treatment. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is willing to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court while granting bail, including furnishing personal bonds, sureties, or any other conditions deemed necessary to secure his attendance during the trial. As such, the applicant is entitled to the bene<t of parity with the co-accused and should be granted bail pending investigation/trial. He further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 13.02.2025 and the 3 conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicant but could not dispute the fact that the co- accused person has already been granted regular bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents as well as the fact that the co-accused, Shekhar Chaturthi who is similarly situated with respect to the allegations and the nature of the o>ence, has been enlarged on bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) Nos. 10726 of 2025, vide order dated 16.09.2025, as such the principle of parity in bail cannot be overlooked, the applicant is similarly situated with respect to the allegations and the nature of the o>ence. No material distinction has been brought to notice which would justify di>erential treatment in the matter of bail. The applicant has also undertaken to comply with all conditions that this Court may deem <t to impose to ensure his attendance during trial. In the said circumstance, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let applicant - Gujjala Jagdish Kumar, involved in Crime No. 08/2025 registered at Police Station - Cyber Range-Bilaspur, District & Revenue District - Bilaspur (C.G.) for the o>ences punishable under Sections 61, 317(5), 318(4), 111(3)(4) and 323 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be 4 released on bail on his 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 <le an undertaking to the e>ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates <xed 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 <xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without suFcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of BNS. (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 <xed in such proclamation, then, the trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of BNS. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial Court on the dates <xed 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 are deliberate or without suFcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial 5 Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 9. OFce is directed to send a certi<ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek