The principle of parity in bail applications is not applicable when the role of the applicant is qualitatively different and more severe (e.g., acting as an intermediary in an organized cyber fraud syndicate) compared to the co-accused who were granted bail.

Order on Board

1 The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.283/2025, registered at Police Station – Azad Chowk, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 .

2 Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs has established the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal for reporting cyber frauds committed across the country. During scrutiny of the information received through the said portal, it came to the notice of the Cyber Range, Raipur that 17 bank accounts opened in the South Indian Bank, Ramsagarpara Branch, Raipur were allegedly being used for receiving proceeds of cyber fraud. On the basis of the information received from the Police Headquarters, Raipur, Crime No. 283/2025 was registered against the account holders for the offences punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5) of the BNS, and investigation was commenced. During the course of investigation, it was found that a sum of ₹2,11,10,263/- obtained through cyber fraud had been credited into the bank account of co-accused Santosh Kumar bearing Account No. 0433053000007320 maintained with South Indian Bank. It is further alleged that, on the basis of the memorandum statement of co-accused Karan Singh, the involvement of the present applicant surfaced, whereupon he was arrested. The investigation further revealed that the present applicant, in connivance with the other co-accused persons, had facilitated the opening and use of as many as 17 bank accounts for receiving the proceeds of cyber fraud. It is also alleged that the aforesaid bank account of co-accused Santosh Kumar had been sold to him by the present applicant and the said account was used for routing cyber fraud proceeds amounting to ₹2,11,10,263/-. It is further alleged that co-accused Karan Singh had also sold his bank account to the present applicant, into which an amount of 46,61,115/- obtained through cyber fraud was credited. After completion of investigation, a supplementary charge-sheet has been filed against the present applicant before the competent Court.

3 Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. He submits that the allegations levelled against the applicant are vague and omnibus in nature and do not prima facie disclose the commission of the offences alleged against him. He further submits that the applicant has been implicated solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of co-accused Karan Singh, which by itself has no substantive evidentiary value in law. It is also submitted that during the course of investigation, no mule bank account has been found or recovered in the name of the present applicant, nor has any documentary evidence been collected to establish his involvement in the alleged cyber fraud. He further submits that even the mobile number linked with the alleged mule account does not belong to the present applicant and the supplementary charge-sheet does not disclose any active role or incriminating material connecting him with the alleged offence. Learned counsel further submits that co-accused persons, namely, Narayan Kosariya and Gopi Verma, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide common order dated 16.06.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 4000/2026 and M.Cr.C. No. 3184/2026, and the case of the present applicant stands on a similar footing. He further submits that the supplementary charge-sheet has already been filed and no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. It is also submitted that the applicant is in judicial custody since 21.12.2025, Therefore, considering the period of detention, the filing of the supplementary charge-sheet and the par