Bail Granted on Grounds of Parity in Cybercrime Mule Account Conspiracy Involving Cheating and Money Laundering

The applicant, Prashant, was arrested on April 23, 2025, in connection with Crime No. 40/2025

Following an inquiry by the Cyber Crime Coordination Centre, it was alleged that various bank accounts (mule accounts) were used to launder proceeds of cybercrime totaling ₹8,22,146/-

Although the applicant did not hold a mule account himself, he was implicated based on the memorandum statements of co-accused persons for alleged involvement in cheating through other accounts

The applicant sought regular bail on the grounds of parity with co-accused persons who had already been granted bail and the fact that he had been acquitted in his only previous criminal antecedent

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, on the grounds of parity with co-accused and the completion of the investigation

The court applied the provisions governing regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (formerly Section 439 CrPC)

The charges involved Sections 318(4) (Cheating), 317(2), 317(4), 317(5) (Stolen property), and 61(2)(A) (Criminal Conspiracy) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023

The court relied on the principle of parity, noting bail orders for co-accused persons Sukhdev Sahu (MCRC No. 3709/2026), Abhishek Jaiswal (MCRC No. 3251/2026), Rajesh Sonkar (MCRC No. 3567/2026), and the Supreme Court's order regarding Nitish Puri (SLP No. 16083/2025)

The Court observed that multiple co-accused individuals facing similar allegations had already been granted bail by both the High Court and the Supreme Court

It noted that while the prosecution alleged a criminal conspiracy involving fraudulent transactions, the applicant himself was not the holder of the identified mule accounts

The Court further considered that the charge-sheet had already been filed, meaning the custodial interrogation was no longer required for investigation, and the applicant had been in jail since April 2025

Highlighting that the trial would take considerable time and that the applicant's single previous antecedent resulted in an acquittal, the Court found it just to extend the benefit of parity to the applicant

The applicant was ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions: he must not seek unnecessary adjournments, must appear at every trial stage (specifically for framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 BNSS), and must comply with procedures under Section 209 and 269 of the BNS in case of default