Grant of Second Bail Application on Parity with Co-accused in Organized Cyber Fraud Case

The applicant filed a second bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, following the rejection of his first bail application (MCRC No. 9652/2025) on merits.

The applicant was arrested in connection with Crime No. 129/2025 involving an organized cyber-crime syndicate that allegedly utilized multiple "mule" bank accounts to layer and siphon off fraudulent proceeds amounting to ₹64,10,855/-.

The prosecution alleged the applicant's account was actively used to receive and withdraw cyber-fraud proceeds.

The applicant sought bail on the grounds of parity, noting that the Supreme Court and the High Court had granted bail to identically situated co-accused persons after the rejection of his initial plea.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail on the grounds of parity with co-accused persons who were granted bail by superior or coordinate courts after the applicant's first bail rejection.

Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 (corresponding to Section 439 of the CrPC) regarding the High Court's power to grant regular bail.

Principle of parity in bail jurisprudence, specifically considering the Supreme Court's order in Ishika Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh (Criminal Appeal No. 4494/2025) and subsequent High Court orders in Avinash Tandekar (MCRC 148/2026), Krishna Ghodesawar (MCRC 902/2026), and Abhinav Nagwanshi (MCRC 3363/2026).

The court acknowledged that while the applicant’s first bail application was rejected due to evidence of active participation in receiving fraudulent funds, a material change in circumstances had occurred.

Specifically, the State did not dispute that the Supreme Court had granted bail to a primary co-accused (Ishika Singh) and that the High Court had granted bail to others (Tandekar, Ghodesawar, and Nagwanshi) whose roles were identical to the applicant.

Furthermore, the court noted that the investigation was substantially complete as the charge-sheet had already been filed.

By applying the principle of parity, the court reasoned that denying bail to the applicant while others in the same position were released would be inconsistent with judicial equity.

The court allowed the second bail application, directing the release of Bhavesh Udwani on a personal bond with two sureties, subject to strict conditions including a prohibition on seeking unnecessary adjournments, mandatory attendance at trial, and consequences for misusing liberty under Sections 209 and 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.