Mule account holders in organized cyber-fraud syndicates are ineligible for bail due to systematic financial impact.

The three applicants filed first bail applications following their arrest in connection with Crime No. 129/2025 involving an organized cyber-fraud syndicate

Investigations by the Police Station Cyber Range, Raipur, revealed that 128 "mule" bank accounts were opened at the Bank of Maharashtra, Raipur Branch, to receive proceeds from online fraud

Specifically, Jai Baghel’s account showed credits of ₹14.34 lakhs; Jujesh Sona’s account showed ₹48.98 lakhs; and an account linked to Sheikh Shoheb (via Ravi Kumar) showed ₹58.41 lakhs, all of which were withdrawn shortly after deposit

Applicants contended they were falsely implicated based on memorandum statements and cited parity with other co-accused who were granted bail by the Supreme Court

1. Whether the applicants are entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, considering the nature of the evidence and the period of custody

2. Whether the principle of parity applies based on bail granted to co-accused by the Supreme Court and High Court in related matters

The Court applied the provisions of Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023

Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 111, and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, relating to stolen property and organized crime

The Court also highlighted the distinct legal approach required for economic offences that "undermine the integrity of the financial system" and have "wide societal repercussions"

The Court observed that the applicants were actively involved in facilitating "mule" accounts used for high-value inter-state cyber fraud

It rejected the plea of parity, noting that the co-accused granted bail by the Supreme Court was a woman who received a minimal amount (₹8,000), whereas the present applicants were involved in transactions totaling lakhs of rupees and were part of an organized network

The Court found that the rapid withdrawal of funds and the multiplicity of complaints from different states (Maharashtra, UP, Rajasthan, WB, MP, Tamil Nadu) substantiated the "inter-state ramifications" and the "deliberate and organized misuse of banking channels"

Furthermore, the Court noted that bail for several other identically situated co-accused had already been rejected by the High Court in July and October 2025

The bail applications of Jai Baghel, Sheikh Shoheb, and Jujesh Sona were rejected

The trial court was directed to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously