1 2026:CGHC:7119 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1414 of 2026 Danka Kameshwar Rao S/o D. Mohan Rao, Aged About 26 Years R/o Premnagar, Mowa P.S. Pandri, Raipur Tehsil And District- Raipur (C.G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Ganj, District- Raipur (C.G.) ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ankur Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09.02.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 79/2025, registered at Police Station - Ganj Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5),111, 3(5), of the BNS. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on the basis of a letter received from the Cyber Range, as many as 41 account holders have been VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.02.10 12:01:58 +0530 2 arrayed as accused, in whose bank accounts the defrauded amounts were allegedly transferred. However, the case of the present applicant is stated to be slightly different from the others, as it is alleged that the applicant had provided his bank account kit to another person, on the basis of which the transactions were carried out. Accordingly, the applicant has been implicated in the aforesaid crime. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. It is further submitted that the investigation is complete and the charge- sheet has already been filed; therefore, no custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. Learned counsel further submits that a similarly situated co-accused, namely Bhagwat Prasad Shukla, having identical allegations and role, has already been enlarged on bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 20364 of 2025, vide order dated 16.01.2026, and another co-accused, namely Devansh Dhruw Malkan, has been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 9659 of 2025, vide order dated 28.01.2026. In view of the settled principle of parity, and considering the fact that the applicant has been in judicial custody for a considerable period, learned counsel humbly prays that the applicant may also be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the case, however, he could not dispute the fact that the co-accused have been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and by this Court. 3 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, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed, and further considering that a similarly situated co-accused, namely Bhagwat Prasad Shukla, has been enlarged on bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 20364 of 2025, vide order dated 16.01.2026, and another co-accused, namely Devansh Dhruw Malkan, has been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 9659 of 2025, vide order dated 28.01.2026, and that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 26.03.2025, this Court is of the considered view that, on the ground of parity, the present applicant also deserves to be released on bail. 7. Let applicant, Danka Kameshwar Rao, involved in Crime No. 79/2025, registered at Police Station - Ganj Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5),111, 3(5), of the BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 4 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 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. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav