Grant of bail for job fraud allegations citing filing of charge-sheet and prolonged judicial custody.

The applicant sought regular bail in connection with Crime No. 11/2025 registered at Police Station Sarangarh for allegedly cheating the complainant by taking money under the pretext of providing a job and subsequently failing to provide the employment or return the funds

The applicant was arrested and remained in judicial custody since 22.09.2025

The defense argued that the FIR lacked specific dates of the transaction and that the applicant had no criminal antecedents

Conversely, the State opposed bail, noting that while the charge-sheet had been filed, the applicant had one criminal antecedent

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, considering the stage of the investigation and the duration of custody.

The court applied Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which governs the power of the High Court to grant bail

The substantive charges were brought under Sections 318(4) (Cheating) and 296 (Obscene acts and songs/Uttering obscene words) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023

The court also referenced procedural compliance under Sections 269, 84, 209, and 351 of the BNSS regarding the conduct of the accused during trial

The Court balanced the gravity of the allegations against the procedural status of the case.

It noted that the investigation was effectively complete as the charge-sheet had already been filed before the competent court

The Court took judicial notice of the fact that the applicant had been in custody since September 2025 and that the trial's conclusion was likely to take significant time

Despite the State's objection regarding a prior antecedent, the Court determined that the applicant's status as a permanent resident with immovable property mitigated the risk of him absconding

Consequently, the Court found that continued incarceration was unnecessary, provided stringent conditions were imposed to ensure the applicant’s participation in the trial

The applicant was ordered to be released upon furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties

The holding was subject to several conditions: the applicant must not seek unnecessary adjournments, must appear on all trial dates (subject to Section 269 BNSS for absence), and must be present specifically for the framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 BNSS

Breach of these conditions allows the trial court to treat the default as an abuse of liberty and proceed in accordance with law