1 2026:CGHC:21448 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2776 of 2026 Saurav Kumar Choudhary S/o Shankar Prasad Choudhary, Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Acharaj, Police Station Bosi, District-Banka Bihar, India Present Adress- Sector- 102, Salarpur, Street Near Khan Clinic, Noida, Uttar Pradesh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Tikrapara, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Virendra Kashyap, Advocate For State/ Non-applicant : Mr. Priyank Rathi, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 07.05.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.734/2025, registered at Police ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Digitally signed by ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Date: 2026.05.08 16:35:47 +0530 2 Station: Tikrapara, District-Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) & 3(5) (mentioned as per the trial Court), but in the bail application the same has been mentioned as under Section 318(4) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. That, the prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant alleged that an unknown person committed cyber fraud by sending a fraudulent WhatsApp link, pursuant to which an amount of Rs. 5,12,900/- was allegedly withdrawn from her bank account. On the basis of the complaint, FIR bearing Crime No. 734/2025 was registered at Police Station Tikrapara, District Raipur against unknown persons for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. During investigation, the present applicant was implicated on the basis of alleged bank transactions and electronic evidence, though his name does not appear in the FIR. It is alleged that the applicant was involved in the cyber fraud transaction and accordingly he was taken into judicial custody on 27.10.2025. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur on 22.12.2025. 3 3. That the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and there is no direct evidence connecting him with the alleged cyber fraud. It is submitted that the FIR was registered against unknown persons and the name of the present applicant does not appear in the FIR, and he has been implicated only during the course of investigation on the basis of alleged electronic and documentary evidence. The charge- sheet has already been filed on 22.12.2025 and the applicant is in judicial custody since 27.10.2025, therefore no further custodial interrogation is required. It is further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and similarly situated co-accused Mohammad Irfan Ansari and Alok Kumar have already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 24.02.2026 passed in MCRC No. 794/2026 and MCRC No. 851/2026, hence the applicant is also entitled to the benefit of parity. Hence, he is enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant is involved in a serious offence of cyber fraud wherein a substantial amount was illegally siphoned off from the complainant’s bank account through organized electronic transactions. It is further submitted that 4 during investigation, sufÏcient electronic and documentary evidence has been collected which prima facie establishes the involvement of the applicant in the alleged offence. The State submits that merely because the charge-sheet has been filed or co-accused persons have been granted bail does not entitle the present applicant to bail as a matter of right, as the role of each accused is required to be considered independently. Therefore, considering the gravity and nature of allegations, it is prayed that the bail application be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the nature of allegations, material available on record and the fact that the applicant has been implicated during the course of investigation mainly on the basis of electronic and documentary evidence, this Court finds that the FIR was initially registered against unknown persons and the role attributed to the present applicant is required to be examined during trial. It is also not in dispute that similarly situated co- accused persons have already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 24.02.2026 passed in MCRC 5 No. 794/2026 and MCRC No. 851/2026, and the case of the present applicant stands on similar footing. The applicant is in judicial custody since 27.10.2025, the charge-sheet has already been filed and there are no previous criminal antecedents against him. Considering the period of detention, completion of investigation and the principle of parity, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to allow the application. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. Let applicant- Saurav Kumar Choudhary involved inCrime No.734/2025, registered at Police Station: Tikrapara, District-Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) & 3(5) (mentioned as per the trial Court), but in the bail application the same has been mentioned as under Section 318(4) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 6 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 them 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 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 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 Section 209 of 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. 8. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the 7 trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Arpan