1 2026:CGHC:10557 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1044 of 2026 Sunil Patil S/o Shri Basant Patil Aged About 27 Years R/o House No. 701 Santoshi Para, Purena P.S. Telibandha, Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - S.H.O. P.S. City Kotwali Tahsil And District Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Abhishek Tandon, Advocate (through V.C.) For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sourabh K. Pande, Deputy Advocate General. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 28.02.2026 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. 45/2025, registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5) and 111 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. According to the prosecution story, a letter from the OfÏce of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Range Cyber Police Station, regarding the investigation of mule accounts was received by Police Station City Kotwali, upon which the investigation was conducted by the police ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.02.28 17:47:11 +0530 2 authorities. During the investigation, the police ofÏcials found 41 mule bank accounts holding a total amount of Rs. 18,96,851/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakh Ninety-Six Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty-One only), allegedly derived from cybercrime, in accounts maintained at Kotak Mahindra Bank, Branch Raipur. The bank account of the present applicant was also identified during the investigation, which allegedly held a fraudulent amount of Rs. 10,998/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Nine Hundred and Ninety-Eight only), purportedly duped from the victim, Raghuwendra Pratap of Patna, Bihar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the other co-accused, namely Sarveshwar Barik, has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 27.02.2026 passed in MCRC No. 2012 of 2026. The case of the present applicant is similar to that of the said co-accused, therefore, the present applicant is also entitled to be released on regular bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case. 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 as the co-accused person, namely, Sarveshwar Barik, has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 27.02.2026 passed in MCRC No. 2012 of 2026, moreover, the fact that the charge - sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and he has been in jail since 26.03.2025, conclusion of the trial may take 3 some more time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Let the Applicant – Sunil Patil, involved in Crime No. 45/2025, registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5) and 111 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 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 4 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. 8. 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