Chhattisgarh High Court

Anticipatory bail granted where implication rests solely on co-accused's memorandum and parity is established.

RAJKUMAR SAHU vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High CourtJUDGMENT: April 01, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The applicant sought anticipatory bail regarding Crime No. 433/2025 involving alleged financial fraud

Source reference: para. 1

The complainant alleged that the main accused individuals lured him into investing ₹39,10,000 with promises of extraordinary stock market returns

Source reference: para. 2

The applicant was not named in the First Information Report (FIR) nor in the complainant's Section 180 statement; he was implicated solely based on a memorandum statement provided by co-accused Chandraprakash

Source reference: para. 2-3

The applicant moved the High Court asserting false implication and seeking parity with other co-accused who had already been granted bail

Source reference: para. 3
02

Issues

Whether the applicant is entitled to the protection of anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) based on the nature of the evidence and the principle of parity

Source reference: para. 5
03

Law Applied

The Court primarily applied Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which governs the grant of anticipatory bail

Source reference: para. 1

The substantive charges involved Sections 318(4), 316(5), 318(3), 111, and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, relating to cheating and organized crime

Source reference: para. 1-2

The court further applied the principle of judicial parity, noting that similarly situated co-accused had been granted relief under MCRC No. 1950/2026, MCRCA No. 58/2026, and MCRCA No. 159/2026

Source reference: para. 5
04

Reasoning

The Court observed that the applicant’s implication rested exclusively on the memorandum statement of a co-accused rather than direct naming in the FIR or initial statements

Source reference: para. 2-3

In evaluating the merits, the Court emphasized that three co-accused—Chandraprakash, Smt. Shashi Sahu, and Ranu Dhruw—had already been granted regular or anticipatory bail by the same Court in early 2026

Source reference: para. 5

The Court reasoned that since the investigation and trial were likely to be protracted, and considering the specific facts and circumstances of the applicant's late inclusion in the case, the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail was warranted

Source reference: para. 5
05

Holding

The High Court allowed the anticipatory bail application

It held that the applicant should be released on bail in the event of arrest upon executing a personal bond and one surety, subject to conditions including: (a) non-interference with witnesses; (b) regular appearance before the trial court; (c) submission of verified Aadhaar details; and (d) a prohibition against committing similar future offences

Source reference: para. 6
Chhattisgarh High Court

Original Court PDF

RAJKUMAR SAHUvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High Court · April 01, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment