SHUBHAM SAHU vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010415362026
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 10285 of 2026
Shubham Sahu S/o Manharan Sahu, Aged About 24 Years R/o
Shivanand Nagar, Khamtarai, Raipur Tahsil And District Raipur (C.G.)
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
Rakhi, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.).

... Non-Applicant(s)
For Applicant : Ms. Khushbu Sahu, Advocate.
For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Dy. Adv. Gen.
Hon'ble Mr. Rakesh Mohan Pandey, Judge
Order on Board
03/11/2026
1. This is the second bail application filed by the applicant 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. 157/2025, registered at Police Station Rakhi, District
Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 317(2),
317(4), 317(5), 111 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.

2
The earlier first bail application of the applicant was rejected by a
2.
coordinate Bench of this Court in MCRC No. 4410 of 2026 vide
order dated 16.06.2026 on merits. Hence, the present second bail
application.
3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant lodged a
report at Police Station Rakhi, District Raipur, alleging certain
suspicious transactions through Bank Account No.
7484000100017644, standing in the name of co-accused Yogesh
@ Lalla Yadav. During investigation, the involvement of the
applicant was allegedly disclosed on the basis of the
memorandum statement of co-accused Yogesh @ Lalla Yadav. It
is alleged that the applicant had assisted the said co-accused in
connection with the transactions. On the basis of the report and
the material collected during investigation, the aforesaid offences
were registered against the applicant and other accused persons.
The applicant was arrested on 21.12.2025. After completion of
investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent
Court.
Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the first bail
4.
application of the applicant was rejected by a coordinate Bench of
this Court on merits. The new ground for filing the present second
bail application is that the bail applications of the applicant and co-
accused persons, namely, Pravin Soni, Abdul Hidayat Khan,
Rupesh Sinha and Yogesh @ Lalla Yadav, were decided together

3
and rejected by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated
16.06.2026 thereafter, two of the co-accused namely Pravin Soni
and Abdul Hidayat Khan approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court
by filing SLP (Criminal) Nos. 12985 of 2026 and 13826 of 2026,
respectively, and the Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide order dated
02.09.2026, granted them bail. It is further submitted that co-
accused Rupesh Sinha, claiming parity with the aforesaid co-
accused persons, has also been granted bail by this Court in
MCRC No. 9879 of 2026 vide order dated 15.10.2026. Learned
counsel would submit that the case of the present applicant is on
similar footing and therefore, he is also entitled to the benefit of
parity. It is further submitted that the applicant is a regular student
of Colambiya College, Raipur, pursuing a Diploma in Civil
Engineering, and that he has been implicated merely on the basis
of the memorandum statement of the co-accused. On these
grounds, learned counsel prays for grant of bail.
5. On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the
prayer for grant of bail and submit that the earlier first bail
application of the applicant was rejected by a coordinate Bench of
this Court on merits. However, she could not dispute the fact that
similarly situated co-accused persons, namely, Pravin Soni and
Abdul Hidayat Khan, have been granted bail by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court and co-accused Rupesh Sinha has been granted
bail by this Court.

4
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
6.
diary.
7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case,
nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the applicant and
the fact that the bail applications of co-accused Pravin Soni and
Abdul Hidayat Khan were rejected by a coordinate Bench of this
Court in MCRC Nos. 3086 of 2026 and 3646 of 2026,
respectively, vide order dated 16.06.2026, whereafter they
approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing SLP (Criminal)
Nos. 12985 of 2026 and 13826 of 2026, respectively, and were
granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated
02.09.2026 and further considering that co-accused Rupesh
Sinha has also been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 9879
of 2026 vide order dated 15.10.2026, I am of the view that the
applicant is also entitled to the benefit of parity. Accordingly,
without further commenting upon the merits of the case, I am
inclined to grant bail to the applicant.
8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed . 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

5
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 the trial.
dorthwith.
- S/- Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
Judge
Kunal