Grant of regular bail for job fraud where co-accused were granted anticipatory bail and charge-sheet is filed.

The applicant sought regular bail following his arrest on December 9, 2025, in connection with Crime No. 167/2025 at Police Station Rajhara.

The prosecution alleged that the applicant, acting in concert with co-accused Purnima Upadhyaya and Mamta Mishra, induced the complainant and 25 other aspirants to pay approximately Rs. 10,40,000/- under the false pretext of securing employment in mines.

Portions of the funds were allegedly transferred to the applicant via PhonePe.

The applicant contended he was falsely implicated and noted that the co-accused had already been granted anticipatory bail.

While the State opposed bail citing the applicant's five prior criminal antecedents, the applicant maintained he was on bail in all previous matters.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering the nature of the fraud, his period of detention, and the principle of parity with co-accused

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

It also considered Sections 318(4) (cheating) and 3(5) (joint liability) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

Procedurally, the Court looked to Sections 209 (contempt/non-appearance), 269 (non-attendance in obedience to order), and 351 (recording of statement) of the BNS/BNSS to impose conditions ensuring the applicant’s presence during trial.

The Court balanced the gravity of the allegations—specifically the systematic inducement and collection of money from unemployed individuals—against the procedural status of the case.

It observed that the applicant had been in custody since December 9, 2025, and that the investigation was complete as the charge-sheet had already been filed.

Crucially, the Court applied the principle of parity, noting that the two primary co-accused had been granted anticipatory bail in September 2025.

Regarding the applicant’s criminal history, the Court noted that while he had five antecedents, he had secured bail in all those cases, suggesting he was not currently a flight risk or a persistent violator of bail conditions.

The bail is subject to strict conditions: the applicant must not seek unnecessary adjournments, must appear personally for the framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 of the BNSS, and must comply with all procedural summons on threat of proceedings under Section 209 of the BNS.