1 2026:CGHC:24369 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.Cr.C No.4861 of 2026 Kamleshwar Singh S/o Shri Basant Singh, Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Bodelipara, Sonpur Outpost - Karanji, P. S. Vishrampur, District - Surajpur (CG) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station - Vishrampur, District - Surajpur (CG) ... Non-Applicant _____________________________________________________ For Applicant :Mr. Siddhant Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State :Ms. Vaishali Mahilang, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 17.06.2026 1. The Applicant has preferred this 2nd 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.83/2025 registered at Police SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.06.18 10:58:28 +0530 2 Station – Vishrampur, District Surajpur (C.G.), for the offences under Sections 317(4), 318(4) and 61(2)(A) of BNS, 2023 as also under Section 66 (D) of IT Act. Earlier application was rejected on merits vide order dated 16.12.2025 passed in M.Cr.C No.9232/2025. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that pursuant to directions issued by the Office of the Additional Superintendent of Police, an inquiry was conducted regarding Mule Account No. 50200038421730 maintained by the co-accused Sajjan Gupta with HDFC Bank. During the inquiry, account holders i.e. Chandradev Paikra and Rupan Paikra stated that the present Applicant had induced them to provide their bank account details on the assurance of payment of commission. Acting on such inducement, they shared their account particulars and received commission amounts. It is alleged that transactions amounting to Rs.20,39,596/- were routed through the said account, which was allegedly used for the transfer of fraudulently obtained funds. Complaints in relation to the said transactions were registered in the States of Karnataka and Maharashtra. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the present offences came to be registered against the present Applicant. Hence this application. 3. Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant 3 is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, who is in jail since 17.04.2025. He further submits that co-accused Sajjan Kumar Gupta has already been granted bail vide order dated 28.04.2026 passed in M.Cr.C No.2832/2026, the case of the present Applicant is identical and out of total 8 witnesses, only 3 have been examined. It is lastly submitted that conclusion of trial is likely to take quite some time, therefore, the Applicant may be granted bail on the grounds of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and does not dispute the fact that co-accused has been granted bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the parties, the nature of allegations, the pre-trial detention, charge sheet has been filed and further considering that co-accused Sajjan Kumar Gupta has already been granted bail vide order dated 28.04.2026 passed in M.Cr.C No.2832/2026 and the likelihood of the trial taking considerable time, without further commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to allow the application. Accordingly, the 4 application is allowed. 7. Let Applicant- Kamleshwar Singh involved in Crime No.83/2025 registered at Police Station – Vishrampur, District Surajpur (C.G.), for the offences under Sections 317(4), 318(4) and 61(2)(A) of BNS, 2023 as also under Section 66 (D) of IT Act 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. (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 5 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 Priya