1 CGHC010171232026 2026:CGHC:28274 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3986 of 2026 Nidhi Garg W/o Kapil Garg (Wrongly Mentioned In The Impugned Order S/o Kapil Garg) Aged About 36 Years R/o Royal Residency, Dhimrapur, Road Police Station City Kotwali District- Raigarh (C.G.) Wrongly Mentioned In The Cause Title Of Impugned Order As Bihar) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Cyber Police Station Raigarh, District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe Senior Advocate along with Mr. Kabeer Kalwani, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 08.07.2026 1. This is the first 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. 04/2026, registered at Cyber Police Station - Raigarh, District- Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 61(2), VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.08 18:29:28 +0530 2 316(2), 112(2), 319(2), 318(2), 338, 336(3), 336(4), 340(2) of the BNS 2023 and Section 66C and 66D of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the First Information Report was lodged by the complainant, Ramkumar Shukla, who is an auto driver by profession. According to the prosecution, in the month of November, the complainant visited Nidhi Parivahan Kendra, situated at Darogapara, Raigarh, along with certain other persons for obtaining a driving licence. At the said establishment, various services were allegedly being provided, including matrimonial match-making, preparation of R.T.O.-related documents, birth certificates, caste certificates, character certificates, and other documents purportedly issued by Government authorities. During the course of investigation, it was alleged that Nidhi Parivahan Kendra and Shanti Shiksha Society were operating a call centre/choice centre through several female employees, who, under the guise of providing matrimonial services, induced unsuspecting persons to part with money on false assurances of arranging marriages. It is further alleged that the said establishment was also engaged in preparing forged Government documents, including driving licences, Aadhaar cards, PAN cards, marriage certificates, and other documents by using forged seals and stationery of Government authorities. The prosecution further alleges that video editing work for uploading content on YouTube was also carried out from the same premises. It is alleged that the present applicant, along with the other co-accused persons, namely Kapil Garg, Neha Garg, Himanshu Mehar, and Hemant Soni, in furtherance 3 of their common intention, prepared forged documents and participated in the operation of the alleged fraudulent matrimonial centre. It is further alleged that, by sending photographs of women as prospective brides and engaging in conversations with persons seeking matrimonial alliances, the accused persons dishonestly induced them to make payments on different occasions under the pretext of facilitating marriage. According to the prosecution, as many as 7,999 persons were cheated through the said modus operandi, and during the course of investigation, the alleged cheated amount has been assessed at approximately Rs. 1,27,60,000/-. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged. It is contended that the allegations against the applicant are vague, omnibus and bereft of any specific overt act, and even if the entire prosecution case is accepted at its face value, no material discloses her active involvement in the alleged preparation of forged documents or in running the purported matrimonial call centre. It is further submitted that the applicant is a housewife and has no concern with the business activities allegedly carried out by her husband, co-accused Kapil Garg, who was managing and controlling the affairs of Nidhi Parivahan Kendra and Shanti Shiksha Society even prior to their marriage. Learned counsel submits that no incriminating article or forged document has been recovered from the possession of the applicant, nor is there any material to show that she derived any wrongful gain or had any knowledge of or participation in the alleged illegal activities. It is also submitted that the allegations 4 regarding sending photographs of prospective brides, operating the call centre, or inducing persons to part with money are general in nature and no specific role has been attributed to the applicant either in the FIR or in the statements recorded during investigation. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is the mother of a two-year- old infant child, who is presently being looked after by her 62-year-old grandmother as both parents are in custody, causing severe hardship to the child. It is also submitted that several co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by the learned Sessions Court and the case of the present applicant stands on a better footing, thereby entitling her to the benefit of parity. It is lastly submitted that the applicant is a permanent resident, there is no likelihood of her absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence or influencing the witnesses, and she is ready and willing to furnish adequate bail bonds and abide by all such terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court while granting her bail. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations levelled against the applicant, the fact that she is a housewife and the mother of a two-year-old infant child, who is presently being looked after by her 62-year-old grandmother as both the applicant and her husband are in judicial custody, the absence of 5 any criminal antecedents, the fact that no specific overt act or recovery has been attributed to the present applicant, the charge- sheet having already been filed, and the applicant having remained in judicial custody since 14.04.2026, and further considering that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the view that the case of the present applicant stands on a footing distinguishable from that of her husband/co-accused. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of regular bail to the present applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let applicant, Nidhi Garg, involved in Crime No. 04/2026, registered at Cyber Police Station - Raigarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 61(2), 316(2), 112(2), 319(2), 318(2), 338, 336(3), 336(4), 340(2) of the BNS 2023 and Section 66C and 66D of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 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 she 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. 6 (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 her, 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 her in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav