1 CGHC010295692026 2026:CGHC:40236 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7144 of 2026 • Narendra Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Kartikram Sahu Aged About 35 Years R/o Madiyapar Police Station Bori, Tehsil And District- Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station Newai, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Virendra Kashyap, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Dy.A.G. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 15.09 .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. 306/2026 registered at Police Station- Newai, District- Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(2), 318(3), 318(4) and Section 3(5) of the B.N.S. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on scrutiny, certain bank accounts allegedly, were identified as "Layer-1/Mule Accounts" through the Coordination Portal. It was also found that certain amounts allegedly connected with cyber fraud were credited into various bank accounts and thereafter transferred to other accounts. VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.09.16 14:32:25 +0530 2 The FIR has been registered against several account holders on the allegation that their accounts were used for receiving, concealing and transferring the alleged proceeds of cyber fraud and applicant's name has been arrayed as an accused on the allegation that his bank account was allegedly used in connection with the aforesaid transactions. However, there is no specific allegation in the FIR showing that the Applicant himself committed any cyber fraud, induced any victim, participated in any fraudulent transaction, or personally obtained any wrongful gain from the alleged transactions 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He also submits that the bail application of co-accused Bhagwat Prasad Shukla was earlier rejected by this Court, however, he preferred SLP (Crl.) No. 20364/2025 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and vide order dated 16.01.2026, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has granted bail to him. It is further submitted that co-accused persons namely Ayush Pandey and Rajendra Kumar Puran have already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 1586/2026, vide order dated 13.02.2026 and MCRC No.2103 of 2026 vide order dated 03.03.2026. The applicant is in judicial custody since 13.06.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. Therefore, on the ground of parity and prolonged detention, the applicant prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel, appearing for the State/non-applicant, submit that the charge-sheet has not been filed before the competent Court and the trial is currently in progress. He further concur with the submission made on behalf of the applicant to the effect that the principle of parity may be considered, however, he contend that the serious nature of the offences, the ongoing 3 investigation and the possibility of influencing witnesses weigh against granting bail to the applicant at this stage. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case that the bail application of co-accused Bhagwat Prasad Shukla was earlier rejected by this Court, however, he preferred SLP (Crl.) No. 20364/2025 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and vide order dated 16.01.2026, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has granted bail to Bhagwat Prasad Shukla. Subsequently, co-accused persons namely Ayush Pandey and Rajendra Kumar Puran have been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 1586/2026, vide order dated 13.02.2026 and MCRC No.2103 of 2026 vide order dated 03.03.2026. The applicant is in judicial custody since 13.06.2026 and he has no criminal antecedent. The conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, thus, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the regular bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (i) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court; (ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, & (iii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of 4 the trial. 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 Vaishali