MP HC Grants Bail To Alleged Cyber-Fraud Accused, Citing His 9-Month-Old Child And Sole-Breadwinner Status, Subject To ₹5 Lakh Deposit

The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No. 161/2026, registered at the Crime Branch Police Station, Indore, for alleged offences under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

He had been in detention since 7 October 2026.

The prosecution alleged that more than 174 cyber complaints were linked to his bank account and that he had provided his account and SIM card to co-accused for use in multi-state cyber fraud.

The applicant relied on his lack of criminal antecedents, family circumstances, and the likely duration of trial; the State opposed bail on the basis of the allegations’ gravity.

Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, empowers the High Court to grant regular bail; the Court also directed compliance with the conditions under Section 480(3) of the BNSS.

The alleged offences were under Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.

The Court invoked the principles that “bail is the rule, jail is the exception” and that personal liberty is protected by Article 21 of the Constitution, while balancing those principles against the seriousness of the alleged offence and the interests of society.

The applicant’s counsel cited Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2022) 10 SCC 51, and Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273, in support of an argument concerning compliance by the authorities; the order does not separately set out or apply a specific rule from those decisions.

The Court acknowledged the seriousness of the allegations, including the alleged use of the applicant’s bank account and SIM card in cyber fraud, but considered his age, lack of criminal antecedents, young child, and role as the family’s sole breadwinner.

It also considered that the trial would take considerable time.

Balancing these matters against the interests of society and the applicant’s liberty under Article 21, the Court found that bail with appropriate conditions would serve the interests of justice, without expressing a view on the merits.

Further conditions included depositing Rs. 5 lakh, filing an undertaking to attend the investigation and trial, providing permanent address and contact details, depositing any passport, refraining from conduct affecting the investigation, and marking attendance at the police station on the first Saturday of each month until trial concludes.

The order states that the Rs. 5 lakh deposit must be made “within 48 years from today”; this appears anomalous in the text, and the order as provided does not clarify or correct it.

Breach of the conditions may result in a prosecution application for cancellation of bail, and the order remains effective until the end of trial unless rendered ineffective by bail-jumping or breach.