Regular Bail Granted on Grounds of Parity in Cyber Fraud Case Involving Mule Accounts

The applicant, Manish Kumar Yadav, was arrested on 26.03.2025 in connection with Crime No. 129/2025 for allegedly facilitating cyber fraud.

Investigations into 128 "mule accounts" at the Bank of Maharashtra revealed that the applicant’s account received proceeds totaling ₹1,12,38,794/-, linked to a fraud involving complainant Isha Devi and others.

The applicant filed this first bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS, contending false implication and seeking parity with co-accused Ishika Singh and Avinash Tandekar, who were previously granted bail by the Supreme Court and High Court respectively.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS on the grounds of parity and prolonged pretrial detention.

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

Substantively, the case involved Sections 111 (Organized crime), 317(2), 317(4), 317(5) (Stolen property), and 3(5) (Common intention) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

The court relied on the Principle of Parity, ensuring that similarly situated accused persons receive equal treatment under the law, and considered the progress of the trial and length of incarceration (jail since 26.03.2025) as factors for bail.

The Court examined the nature and gravity of the offense, acknowledging the allegation of cyber fraud and the high volume of transactions in the applicant's account.

However, it observed that the applicant had been in custody for over a year (since 26.03.2025) and that the charge-sheet had already been filed.

Crucially, the Court noted that the case against the present applicant was identical to that of co-accused Ishika Singh, who secured bail from the Supreme Court, and Avinash Tandekar, who was granted bail by the High Court.

Given that the trial was likely to take considerable time to conclude, the Court determined that continued detention was unnecessary and that the applicant met the criteria for release on the grounds of parity.

The High Court allowed the bail application, granting the applicant regular bail. The applicant was ordered to be released upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions including mandatory attendance at trial dates, non-seeking of adjournments during evidence, and compliance with Sections 269 and 209 of the BNS in the event of default or misuse of liberty.