1 2026:CGHC:19060 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2526 of 2026 Suhail Khan Son of Suleman Khan Aged About 24 Years Resident of Old Bus Stand, Behind Kali Mandir, Dongargarh,district- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Hamida Siddiqui and Mr. Harsh Verma, Advocates. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Deputy Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 24.04.2026 1. This is the Second 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. 360/2025 registered at Police Station – Dongargarh, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 9668 of 2025 was rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated 11.12.2025. 3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that during the course of investigation, ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.04.25 18:01:17 +0530 2 upon perusal of the mule account holders through the Samanvaya Portal operated by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, it was found that 21 bank account holders of Bandhan Bank, Dongargarh Branch, had fraudulently obtained a total amount of Rs. 10,06,544/- by committing cyber fraud against several persons in different states of the country. Furthermore, these account holders conspired together to commit online fraud using their bank accounts to earn illegal gains. It has been alleged that the present applicant facilitated a transaction of Rs. 50,000/-. Therefore, offences under Sections 317(2), 317(4), and 317(5) of the B.N.S. were registered against the present applicant. After completion of the investigation, a charge sheet has been filed. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents. He further submits that the second bail application of the other co-accused persons, namely, Priyanshu Janghel and Aryan Namdeo have already been granted by this Court vide order dated 03.03.2026 and 28.02.2026 in MCRC No. 2115 of 2026 and MCRC No. 1532 of 2026. Therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on regular bail on the ground of parity. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the case, however, he does not dispute the fact that the second bail applications of the co- accused persons, namely Priyanshu Jangel and Aryan Namdeo, have already been granted by this Court. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that 3 the applicant has no criminal antecedents and the second bail application of the other co-accused persons, namely, Priyanshu Janghel and Aryan Namdeo have already been granted by this Court vide order dated 03.03.2026 and 28.02.2026 in MCRC No. 2115 of 2026 and MCRC No. 1532 of 2026. Also considering the fact that the charge - sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the applicant has been in jail since 17.07.2025 and conclusion of the trial may takes some more time. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 8. Let the Second Bail of the Applicant – Suhail Khan, involved in Crime No. 360/2025 registered at Police Station – Dongargarh, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5) of the Bhartiya 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 4 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. 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 Abhishek