1 CGHC010311112026 2026:CGHC:39708 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7480 of 2026 Manohar Laxman Morey S/o Laxman Vithoba Morey Aged About 46 Years R/o Sanganmayor, District Ahmed Nagar, Maharashtra. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through S H O, Cyber Cell P. S. Cyber Cell Range Durg, District Durg (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar Singh, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey, Judge Order on Board 10.09.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 08/2025 registered at Police Station- Cyber Cell Range Durg, District Durg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(1), 317(4), 319(5) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and under Section 66(D) of the I.T. Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the present applicant, along with other co-accused persons, allegedly indulged in cyber fraud RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 and online cheating and, in furtherance thereof, caused certain amounts to be received in the account of Shri Sant Nivrati Gyandeo Sopan Mukta Bai Sansthan, Pune, Maharashtra. On the basis of the said allegations, the applicant has been implicated in the present crime. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that similarly situated co-accused persons namely, P. Satyanagamurti and Balaji Shrinu have already been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Cr.) No. 9946/2026 vide order dated 31.07.2026, and the allegations levelled against the present applicant are similar in nature, and the applicant is further entitled to the benefit of bail on the ground of parity. He also submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, and he is in jail since 06.02.2026, the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, but could not dispute the fact that co-accused persons have already been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 06.02.2026, the fact that though the present applicant and other co-accused committed online fraud, but other co-accused persons namely, P. Satyanagamurti and Balaji Shrinu, have already been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Cr.) No. 9946/2026 vide order dated 31.07.2026, and the case of present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused persons, further the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant – Manohar Laxman Morey, involved in Crime No. 08/2025 registered at Police Station - Cyber Cell Range Durg, District Durg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(1), 317(4), 319(5) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and under Section 66(D) of the I.T. Act, 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 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 4 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 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/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rahul Dewangan