Second bail bond granted on grounds of parity and completion of investigation despite merit rejection.

The applicant filed a second bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, following the rejection of his first application on merits on 13.11.2025

The prosecution alleged that the applicant and co-accused were involved in transactions of fraudulent online funds totaling Rs. 31,49,312/- in an Axis Bank account, based on information from the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre

The applicant has been in judicial custody since 04.07.2025

Since the rejection of the first bail plea, the investigation concluded with the filing of the charge-sheet and framing of charges

1. Whether the filing of the charge-sheet and the granting of bail to similarly situated co-accused constitutes a sufficient change in circumstances to merit the release of the applicant on regular bail

The court primarily applied the provisions of Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (formerly Section 439 CrPC) regarding the High Court's power to grant bail

It relied on the principle of parity, noting that co-accused Rambharos Yadav and Lakhan Lal Sultan were granted bail in second applications (MCRC No. 1486/2026 and 1960/2026) under identical circumstances

The court also considered the evidentiary weight of hostile witnesses and the right to a timely trial under the BNS/BNSS framework

The court observed that while the first application was rejected on merits, new grounds had emerged: the investigation was complete, the charge-sheet was filed, and custodial interrogation was no longer required

Crucially, the court applied the principle of parity, noting that the applicant stood on an "identical footing" to co-accused persons who were recently enlarged on bail by the same court

The court also factored in the slow progress of the trial, highlighting that two witnesses had already turned hostile and the conclusion of the proceedings was likely to take considerable time

Consequently, the court found that continued pre-trial detention was no longer justified despite the gravity of the alleged cyber fraud

The applicant was directed to be released on a personal bond with two sureties, subject to specific conditions: prohibited from seeking unnecessary adjournments, mandatory appearance at key trial stages (charge framing, Section 351 BNSS statements), and strict compliance with Section 209 and 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) regarding non-appearance