1 CGHC010187492026 2026:CGHC:29005 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4509 of 2026 Shivnath Ram Yadav S/o Shankar Yadav Aged About 30 Years R/o Raikona, P.S. Jashpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer (S.H.O.) P.S. Bagicha, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Dr. Sourabh K. Pande, Dy. Adv. Gen. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 10.07.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.87/2026 registered at Police Station–Bagicha, District Jashpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420 and 34 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the present crime has been registered on the allegation that the applicant, along with the other co-accused persons, in furtherance of their common intention, KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 induced the complainant and several other villagers to invest money in a network scheme namely "Hedgexfund" on the false assurance that the invested amount would be doubled within a short period. Acting upon such inducement, the complainant and other villagers allegedly deposited cash as well as made online payments. It is further alleged that after collecting substantial amounts from various investors, the applicant failed to return the money. During the course of investigation, bank accounts, passbooks, ATM cards and mobile phones were seized and the statements of the witnesses revealed that the applicant had systematically induced several persons to invest in the said scheme. Therefore, aforementioned offences have been registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the name of the applicant does not find place in the First Information Report and he has been implicated subsequently during the course of investigation without there being any cogent material to establish his involvement in the alleged offence. He further submits that the applicant neither induced the complainant nor received any amount from the complainant or any other investor on the false promise of doubling their money and there is no incriminating material available on record connecting the applicant with the alleged offence. He further submits that the applicant is in judicial custody since 11.04.2026 and further the co-accused Anil Lakda has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 09.07.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No.4774/2026, and the case 3 of the present applicant stands on the same footing as that of the said co-accused. Therefore, on the ground of parity, prolonged incarceration and the facts and circumstances of the case, he prays that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the State opposes the bail application and submits that sufficient material has been collected during the course of investigation to prima facie establish the involvement of the present applicant in the alleged offence. He submits that the applicant, along with the co-accused persons, induced several villagers to invest money in the fraudulent investment scheme on the assurance of obtaining double returns and thereafter failed to refund the invested amount. He further submits that bank accounts, passbooks, ATM cards and mobile phones have been seized during investigation and the statements of the witnesses also support the prosecution case. However, he fairly submits that co-accused Anil Lakda has already been granted bail by this Court. Nevertheless, he prays for rejection of the bail application. 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, nature of allegations levelled against the applicant, the fact that the applicant is in judicial custody since 11.04.2026 and charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, the investigation is still in progress and further considering that co-accused Anil Lakda has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 09.07.2026 4 passed in M.Cr.C. No.4774/2026 and the role attributed to the present applicant appears to be similar to that of the said co- accused and the applicant has no criminal antecedent, this Court is of the opinion that the present applicant is also entitled to the benefit of parity. Without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let applicant, Shivnath Ram Yadav, involved in Crime No.87/2026 registered at Police Station–Bagicha, District Jashpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420 and 34 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023., be released on bail on 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 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 5 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. 9. 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 Kunal