1 2026:CGHC:1696 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 272 of 2026 Johan Tandi S/o Tanu Tandi Aged About 35 Years R/o H. No. 3355 Near Timber Market, Opp. Shiv Mandir, Trimurty Nagar (Fafadih), Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Range Cyber Cell Headquarter, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Bharat Lal Dembra, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 12.01.2026 1. This is the Second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 229/2025 registered at Police Station – Range Cyber Cell Headquarter, District – Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 8922 of 2025 was rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated 10.12.2025. 3. As per the prosecution story, in brief, a written complaint was lodged ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.01.13 12:04:37 +0530 2 alleging that the applicant, along with other co-accused, cheated the complainant, and that a total sum of Rs. 21,97,673/- was found to have been deposited in 54 bank accounts. It is further alleged that the applicant and other accused are involved in online fraud. The Range Cyber Cell wrote a letter to Police Station Tikarapara for conducting an enquiry, and accordingly, an enquiry was conducted, pursuant to which the offence was registered against the applicant and the other co- accused. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents. He further submits that the second bail application of the other co-accused persons, namely, Arjun Soni has already been granted by this Court vide order dated 09.01.2026 in MCRC No. 203 of 2026. Therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on regular bail on the ground of parity. 5. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and the second bail application of the other co-accused persons, namely, Arjun Soni has already been granted by this Court vide order dated 09.01.2026 in MCRC No. 203 of 2026. Also considering the fact that the charge - sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the applicant has been in jail since 06.03.2025 and conclusion 3 of the trial may takes some more time. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 8. Let the Second Bail of the Applicant – Johan Tandi, involved in Crime No. 229/2025 registered at Police Station – Range Cyber Cell Headquarter, District – Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on 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 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. 4 (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 Abhishek