RISHABH YADAV vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010335362026 2026:CGHC:38836
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 8123 of 2026
Rishabh Yadav S/o Vinod Kumar Yadav Aged About 18 Years Permanent R/o
House No. 301, Lohiya Nagar, Colony, Post I T I Etawah, Thana Friends
Colony Etawah District- Etawah (Uttar Pradesh) Presently R/o C-13, Mahavir
Nagar, Super State Colony, Telibhnda, District- Raipur (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Ganj,
Raipur Commissionerate Revenue District- Raipur (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Ms. Pragati Jaiswal, Advocate.
For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sumit Singh, Dy. Advocate General.
Digitally
signed by
ABHISHEK
SHRIVAS
Date:
2026.09.02
16:53:06
+0530
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
ABHISHEK
SHRIVAS
Order on Board
02.09.2026
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. 0083/2026
registered at Police Station – Ganj, Raipur Commissionerate, District –
Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 61(2), 112(2),
316(2), 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 337, 338 and 340(2) of the Bhartiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66C and 66D of the Information
Technology Act.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant, namely Deepak

2
Paswan, in his official capacity as an Inspector of the State Police
Department, lodged a written report stating that, on 25.03.2026, the
police authorities received secret information from an informer that an
illegal call centre was being operated from the 2nd and 3rd floors of
Pithaliya Complex, Subhash Nagar, Raipur, wherein US-based citizens
were being contacted and defrauded of large sums of money on the
pretext of arranging loans and improving their credit scores. Thereafter, a
police team was constituted and a raid was conducted, during which
several persons were found working on computers and laptops. Upon
enquiry, it was revealed that the call centre was allegedly being operated
by Vikas Shukla and Sanjay Sharma, residents of Gujarat, through
computers, laptops, internet-calling systems, mobile handsets and other
electronic equipment. The call centre was locally managed by Anil Kumar
Yadav and Saurabh Rajput, who disclosed that the said centre had 31
employees/associates. From the premises/office and the persons present
therein, a total of 53 mobile phones, 17 laptops and 18 computer
systems were seized by the police. Pursuant to the aforesaid incident,
Crime No. 83/2026 was registered at Police Station Ganj, Raipur, against
33 named persons, including the applicant. The applicant, along with the
other accused persons, was arrested on 25.03.2026.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an
innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case.
She further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is
also contended that other co-accused persons, namely – Om Kodvale,
Shivam Pandey, Mohammad Gufaran Hussain have already been
granted bail by this Court vide order dated 01.09.2026 passed in MCRC
No. 8083 of 2026, Therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released
on regular bail on the ground of parity.

3
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of
the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed in
the present case. However, he could not dispute the fact that identically
situated co-accused person has already been granted regular bail by this
Court.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,
particularly that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, further, the
co-accused persons, namely – Om Kodvale, Shivam Pandey,
Mohammad Gufaran Hussain have already been granted bail by this
Court vide order dated 01.09.2026 passed in MCRC No. 8083 of 2026,
moreover, the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before
the competent Court, the applicant has been in custody since
25.03.2026, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable
time. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to
be released on bail on the ground of parity.
7. Let the Bail of the Applicant – Rishabh Yadav , involved in Crime No.
0083/2026 registered at Police Station – Ganj, Raipur Commissionerate,
District – Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 61(2),
112(2), 316(2), 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 337, 338 and 340(2) of the
Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66C and 66D of the
Information Technology 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

4
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
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/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Abhishek