Charge-sheet filing, extended custody, and parity with bailed co-accused support regular bail.

The applicants sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Crime No. 03/2026, registered for alleged offences under Sections 318(4), 317(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000

The prosecution alleged that the complainant was induced through WhatsApp and a mobile application to transfer ₹1,49,50,000 for purported online share trading, but was later asked to make further payments to withdraw the investment

The applicants had been in judicial custody since 21 February 2026; the charge-sheet had been filed, they had no criminal antecedents, and co-accused had been granted bail

The State opposed bail on the basis of the seriousness of the allegations

Whether the applicants should be released on regular bail, having regard to the allegations, the status of the investigation, their period of custody, and the grant of bail to co-accused

The application was considered under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which provides the relevant statutory basis for the bail application

The alleged offences were under Sections 318(4), 317(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000

The Court assessed the application by reference to the circumstances it identified, including the nature and gravity of the allegations, filing of the charge-sheet, antecedents, period of custody, likely duration of trial, and bail granted to co-accused; no precedent was cited

The Court acknowledged the seriousness of the alleged offences but considered that the charge-sheet had been filed, the applicants had no criminal antecedents, and they had remained in judicial custody since 21 February 2026.

It also noted that the trial was likely to take time and that co-accused had already been granted bail.

On those circumstances, without expressing an opinion on the merits, the Court found the applicants entitled to bail

Bail was subject to conditions prohibiting interference with witnesses or the fair trial and requiring appearance on every date fixed by the trial Court until disposal of the case

The Court clarified that its observations were confined to the bail application and would not affect the trial Court’s independent decision on the merits.