Grant of parity-based bail for cyber fraud under BNS despite existing criminal antecedents.

The applicant filed a first bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.

He was arrested in connection with Crime No. 46/2025 at P.S. Farasgaon for allegedly conspiring with co-accused to fraudulently open and operate bank accounts for cyber fraud and illegal money transfers.

The applicant contended he was falsely implicated and sought bail on the ground of parity, as co-accused persons Chandan Kumar Vishwakarma and Durgesh Kumar Soni had already been granted bail.

The State opposed the application, citing the applicant's three prior criminal antecedents of a similar nature.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, on the grounds of parity and the completion of the investigation.

The court applied Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the grant of regular bail.

It also considered the substantive offences under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 3(5), and 111 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), 2023, relating to organized crime and fraud.

Furthermore, the court adhered to the principle of parity in bail matters and the procedural consequences of non-appearance under Sections 84, 209, 269, and 351 of the BNS/BNSS.

The court evaluated the facts and circumstances, noting that while the applicant has three criminal antecedents, he had already been granted bail in those cases by the trial court.

The court highlighted that a charge-sheet had already been filed and the applicant had been in custody since May 3, 2026.

Crucially, the court observed that two co-accused persons with similar allegations had already been enlarged on bail by the High Court in MCRC No. 10 of 2026 and MCRC No. 983 of 2026.

Given that the trial was expected to take considerable time, the court determined that the applicant was entitled to bail on the grounds of parity and the stage of the proceedings.

The holding clarified that parity and the filing of the charge-sheet outweighed the applicant's criminal history.

The court imposed several conditions, including a prohibition on seeking unnecessary adjournments, mandatory presence at trial, and warnings that failure to appear would result in proceedings under Sections 209 and 269 of the BNS/BNSS.