Bail granted where alleged account and SIM providers had roles distinct from the main accused.

The applicants sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No. 315/2026, registered for offences under Sections 318(4), 317(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The prosecution alleged that ₹95,000 obtained through cyber fraud was transferred into a bank account held by Sharad Haldar, and that the account was linked to a mobile number allegedly provided by Raja Haldar.

Sharad allegedly handed over his bank passbook and SIM card to co-accused Jai Gupta for ₹2,000; Raja allegedly provided his SIM card and bank account details to Jai Gupta for ₹5,000.

The applicants stated that they were not beneficiaries of the alleged transactions, had no criminal antecedents, and had been in custody since 28 May 2026; the charge-sheet had been filed and trial was likely to take time.

The State opposed bail, alleging organised cyber fraud and multiple complaints linked to the account.

Whether the applicants should be released on regular bail, having regard to their alleged roles, the stage of the investigation, custody, antecedents, and likely duration of trial.

Whether bail should be refused on the State’s allegation that the applicants were involved in organised cyber fraud and that multiple complaints were linked to the bank account.

The Court considered the application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which provides the procedural basis for seeking regular bail before the High Court or Court of Session.

In assessing the applications, it considered the applicants’ respective alleged roles, the filing of the charge-sheet, the period spent in custody, their lack of criminal antecedents, and the expected time for conclusion of trial.

The offences under Sections 318(4), 317(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, were those alleged in the case.

The Court distinguished the applicants’ alleged roles from that of Jai Gupta, described as the alleged main accused: Sharad was alleged to have handed over his account and passbook, while Raja was alleged to have provided his SIM card and bank details.

It also weighed that the charge-sheet had been filed, the applicants had remained in custody since 28 May 2026, neither had criminal antecedents, and trial was likely to take considerable time.

On those circumstances, the Court found it appropriate to grant bail notwithstanding the State’s opposition, without expressing any view on the merits.

It directed that each applicant be released on executing a personal bond of ₹50,000 with one surety for the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial Court, subject to conditions against influencing persons acquainted with the case, prejudicing a fair and expeditious trial, and failure to attend each date fixed by the trial Court.