1 2026:CGHC:6041 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1143 of 2026 Avinash Nishad S/o Chhedilal Nishad Aged About 23 Years R/o Puran Dal Mill Gali, Ramsagar Para, P.S. Azad Chowk, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Tikrapara Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Ms. Khushbu Sahu, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. Govt. Adv. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 03.02.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 229/2025, registered at Police Station : Tikrapara Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111(3) and 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that information was received through the cyber crime reporting portal that a sum of KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 ₹4,48,51,386/- had been transferred into the accounts of the accused persons in Ratnakar Bank Ltd., Branch Raipur, and that these accounts were allegedly being used to receive the proceeds of cyber fraud. Acting on directions from the Police Headquarters, a report regarding the incident was forwarded to Police Station Civil Lines, Raipur, where an FIR was registered against all 17 account holders, including the present applicant, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111(3), and 3(5) of the BNS. 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, however, the present (second) bail application is being filed on new grounds. It is contended that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged crime and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him. The entire case of the prosecution is stated to be false and fabricated, as the applicant has neither transferred nor fraudulently received any amount in his account and has played no role in connection with the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the applicant has been implicated merely on suspicion, without any sufÏcient reason or material available on record. The prosecution has also failed to produce any documentary evidence to substantiate the alleged transactions or the subject amount. It is additionally submitted that co-accused Akhil Kumar Singh has been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 298/2026 vide order dated 12.01.2026, and other co- accused persons, namely Mohit Kumar Sahu, Tushar Bhasgouri, 3 and Gaurav Singh, have also been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 10044/2025, MCRC No. 76/2026, and MCRC No. 10047/2025 vide common order dated 20.01.2026. The case of the present applicant is similar to that of the aforesaid co-accused persons who have already been enlarged on bail, therefore, on the ground of parity, the applicant also deserves to be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel, appearing for the State/non-applicant, submit that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the trial is currently in progress. She further concur with the submission made on behalf of the applicant to the effect that the principle of parity may be considered, however, he contend that the serious nature of the offences, the ongoing investigation and the possibility of influencing witnesses weigh against granting bail to the applicant at this stage. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence levelled against the applicant and the fact that the earlier first bail application of the applicant has been rejected by this Court on merits and the new ground for filing of the second bail application is that similarly situated co-accused namely Akhil Kumar Singh has been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 298/2026 vide order dated 12.01.2026, and other co-accused persons, namely Mohit Kumar Sahu, Tushar Bhasgouri, and Gaurav Singh, have also been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 10044/2025, MCRC No. 76/2026, and MCRC No. 10047/2025 4 vide common order dated 20.01.2026 and the case of the present applicant is similar to that of the aforesaid co-accused persons who have already been enlarged on bail and also in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the present applicant on parity. 7. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant is allowed. 8. Let applicant, Avinash Nishad, involved in Crime No. 229/2025, registered at Police Station : Tikrapara Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111(3) and 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, be released on bail on his furnishing 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 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 sufÏcient 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 5 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 sufÏcient 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. 9. OfÏce 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 Kunal