Anticipatory bail granted on grounds of parity where investigation remains pending and allegations are identical.

The applicant, Yogesh Kumar Sahu, sought anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 694/2025 for offences under Sections 420 (Cheating) and 120-B (Criminal Conspiracy) of the IPC.

The complainant, Dhaal Singh, alleged that in 2020-21, the applicant and a co-accused induced him to invest ₹13,66,534/- into a scheme promising to double the amount in two years.

The funds were transferred to the applicant’s account, but upon maturity, the refund was refused on the grounds that the investment company had liquidated.

The applicant claimed parity with co-accused Gyan Prakash Sahu, who was granted bail previously in MCRCA No. 1108/2025.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, based on the principle of parity and the nature of the allegations.

The Court applied Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (the successor to Section 438 CrPC), governing the grant of bail to persons apprehending arrest.

The Court relied on the principle of judicial parity, noting that a similarly situated co-accused had already been granted relief.

It further considered standard criminal jurisprudence regarding the necessity of detention versus the likelihood of the trial’s duration.

The Court examined the nature of the allegations involving financial fraud and criminal conspiracy.

It noted the applicant's submission that he was a permanent resident with no risk of absconding.

A pivotal factor in the Court's reasoning was the fact that a co-accused, Gyan Prakash Sahu, had already been granted anticipatory bail by the same Court on July 25, 2025, in MCRCA No. 1108/2025.

The Court observed that the investigation and subsequent trial were likely to take considerable time.

Without adjudicating on the ultimate merits of the fraud allegations, the Court determined that the applicant met the criteria for pre-arrest bail, provided stringent conditions were imposed to ensure cooperation with the legal process.

The holding was contingent on five conditions: (a) non-interference with witnesses/evidence, (b) non-prejudicial conduct toward the trial, (c) mandatory appearance at all trial dates, (d) submission and verification of Aadhaar details/photographs, and (e) abstaining from future similar offences.