Facts
The applicant, Karan Yadav, was arrested on 26.05.2025 in connection with Crime No. 145/2025 registered at P.S. Rajim
Source reference: p. 1, 2The prosecution alleged that seven "mule" bank accounts were opened at the Bank of Maharashtra, Rajim Branch, involving fraudulent transactions totaling ₹4,16,96,238/-
Source reference: p. 2The applicant is accused of assisting individuals in opening these accounts in exchange for a fee
Source reference: p. 2Following the filing of the charge-sheet, the applicant moved this First Bail Application seeking parity with co-accused persons who had already been granted bail
Source reference: p. 2Issues
1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, based on the principle of parity and the stage of the trial
Source reference: p. 2Law Applied
The court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the High Court's power to grant bail
Source reference: p. 1The substantive offences were registered under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 318(4), 61(2)A, and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, which relate to fraud and criminal conspiracy
Source reference: p. 2The court also relied on the principle of parity in bail, considering similar relief granted to co-accused in MCRC No. 985, 1269, and 1271 of 2026
Source reference: p. 2, 3Reasoning
The Court observed that the applicant had been in custody since 26.05.2025 and that the investigation was complete, as evidenced by the filing of the charge-sheet
Source reference: p. 2, 3Importantly, the Court noted that the State did not report any criminal antecedents against the applicant
Source reference: p. 3Applying the rule of parity, the Court found that since co-accused persons—facing similar allegations regarding the operation of the mule accounts—had been released by the same Court in January and February 2026, the applicant was entitled to similar relief
Source reference: p. 3The Court further reasoned that the trial would likely consume significant time, justifying release subject to stringent conditions to ensure the applicant's presence
Source reference: p. 3Holding
The Court allowed the bail application and ordered the release of Karan Yadav upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties
The bail is subject to conditions including: (i) an undertaking not to seek unnecessary adjournments; (ii) mandatory presence on all trial dates under penalty of Section 269 BNS; and (iii) strict appearance for the framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 BNSS
Source reference: p. 3, 4The Court answered the issue in the affirmative, holding that the lack of prior criminal record and the principle of parity outweighed the gravity of the allegations at this stage
Source reference: p. 3Original Court PDF
Karan Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh [MCRC No. 1955 of 2026 (2026:CGHC:10739)]
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in