Facts
The applicant, Mohammad Iliyas, was arrested in connection with Crime No. 79/2025 for allegedly depositing ₹27,27,556—obtained through fraudulent means—into various bank accounts and engaging in the concealment of said property
Source reference: p. 2, para. 2Following the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed at Police Station Ganj Range Cyber Raipur
Source reference: p. 2, para. 2The applicant moved this first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), seeking parity with co-accused Bhagawat Prasad Shukla, Ayush Pandey, and Bhanu Pratap Sen, all of whom had previously been granted bail by either the Supreme Court or the High Court
Source reference: p. 2, para. 3Issues
1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail on the grounds of parity and the completion of the investigation
Source reference: p. 3, para. 6Law Applied
The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), regarding the grant of regular bail
Source reference: p. 1, para. 1The court relied on the Principle of Parity, noting that similarly situated co-accused had been granted relief. It specifically referenced the Supreme Court’s order in Bhagawat Prasad Shukla v. State (SLP Crl. No. 20364/2025) and its own previous orders in Ayush Pandey v. State (MCRC No. 1586/2025) and Bhanu Pratap Sen v. State (MCRC No. 2498 of 2026)
Source reference: p. 2, para. 3; p. 3, para. 6Requirements for the accused’s presence during trial proceedings were framed under Sections 269, 84, 209, and 351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)
Source reference: p. 4, para. 7Reasoning
The Court analyzed the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, and the procedural status, noting that the charge-sheet had already been filed
Source reference: p. 3, para. 6The primary factor in the Court's reasoning was the principle of parity; since three co-accused (Shukla, Pandey, and Sen) facing similar allegations had already been released on bail by superior and coordinate benches, the Court found no justification for the continued detention of the applicant
Source reference: p. 3, para. 6The State’s opposition was noted, but the State counsel could not dispute that the co-accused were already at liberty
Source reference: p. 2-3, para. 4Holding
The Court allowed the bail application, holding that the applicant deserves to be released on the ground of parity
The Court ordered the release of Mohammad Iliyas on a personal bond with two sureties, subject to several conditions: (i) no seeking of unnecessary adjournments, (ii) mandatory appearance on trial dates, and (iii) compliance with trial milestones such as framing of charges and recording of statements
Source reference: p. 3-4, para. 7Default in these conditions grants the trial court liberty to treat such actions as an abuse of bail
Source reference: p. 4, para. 7(iv)Original Court PDF
MOHAMMAD ILIYASvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in