1 2026:CGHC:1701 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 332 of 2026 Vinay Sadhwani S/o Shyam Sadhwani Aged About 30 Years R/o Mig 426, D.D.U. Nagar, Sector- 02, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Civil Line Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Ms. Khushbu Sahu, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Deputy Advocate General. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 12.01.2026 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. 44/2025, registered at Police Station - Civil Lines, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 111, 3(5), 317(2), 317(4) and 317(5) of the BNS. 2. According to the case of the prosecution, the brief facts of the matter, 2 an information was received through the cyber crime reporting portal that 104 bank accounts has been fraudulently opened in Utkarsh Small Finance Bank, Civil Lines Branch Raipur and were being used for receiving 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 104 account holders, including the present applicant for commission of aforesaid offence punishable under section 111, 3(5), 317(2), 317(4) and 317(5) of B.N.S. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. It is further submitted that a similarly situated co-accused, namely Harmeet Singh @Yashmit, Saurabh Pal and Tanishq Singh Bhatia and Shubham Singh Thakur, have already been enlarged on bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) Nos. 15006/2025, 12849/2025, 15613/2025 and 17452/2025 vide order dated 19.11.2025, respectively, and on the same ground the co-accused namely Om Arya has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 27.11.2025 passed in MCRC Nos. 9388/2025, and other co-accused have also been granted bail by this Court. In view of the principle of parity, learned counsel 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. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the 3 documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, and further the fact that a similarly situated co-accused, namely Harmeet Singh @Yashmit, Saurabh Pal and Tanishq Singh Bhatia and Shubham Singh Thakur, have already been enlarged on bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) Nos. 15006/2025, 12849/2025, 15613/2025 and 17452/2025 vide order dated 19.11.2025, respectively, and on the same ground the co- accused namely Om Arya has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 27.11.2025 passed in MCRC Nos. 9388/2025, and other co-accused have also been granted bail by this Court, hence 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, Vinay Sadhwani, involved in Crime No. 44/2025, registered at Police Station- Civil Lines, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 111, 3(5), 317(2), 317(4) and 317(5) of the BNS, be 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 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. 4 (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 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/- Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav