Laiq Ahmad v. State of Chhattisgarh

Order On Board

16.10.2026 1) This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 156/2025 registered at Police Station Nevai Thana, District - Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, REKHA SINGH DN: cn=REKHA SINGH, ou=HIGH COURT, o=HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN Date: 2026.10.16 14:38:51 +0530 340(2) read with section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. Earlier first bail application of the applicant bearing MCRC No.8972 of 2025 was rejected on merits vide order dated 05.12.2025. 2) The prosecution case, in brief, is that during the period from

29.04.2025 to 29.05.2025, certain persons impersonating CBI officers contacted the complainant's father and by falsely alleging that his bank account was involved in money-laundering transactions, induced the complainant and his family members to transfer a total amount of Rs.54,90,000/- into various bank accounts. Upon an additional demand of Rs.22,00,000/-, the complainant realized that he had been cheated and lodged a report. Thereafter, the applicant was arrested in connection with the aforesaid offence. Hence, the present bail application. 3) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 03.09.2025; he has two criminal cases pending against him and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. He would further submit that though the first bail application of the applicant was rejected in MCRC No. 8972 of 2025 vide order dated 05.12.2025, six co-accused persons have already been granted bail. He would contend that the allegations against the applicant are similar to those against co-accused Shubham Shrivastava @ Monti Lal in MCRC No.8600 of 2026 vide order dated

05.10.2026 and, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity. Accordingly, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4) On the other hand, learned State counsel, appearing for the State/non-applicant, opposes the bail application. He would submit that the applicant is involved in cyber fraud. He would contend that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits and there is no substantial change in circumstances warranting reconsideration of the prayer for bail. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. 5) I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6) Taking into consideration the fact that the applicant is in jail since

03.09.2025, the charge-sheet has been filed, the trial is likely to take some time to conclude, and six co-accused persons have already been granted bail, including co-accused Shubham Shrivastava @ Monti Lal, who has been granted bail in MCRC No. 8600 of 2026 vide order dated 05.10.2026 on similar allegations, this Court, without commenting on the merits of the case, is inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶7It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

(i) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court;

(ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, &

(iii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. The observation made hereinabove is for the purpose of deciding this bail application only, the learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Rekha

CGHC010407972026 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9939 of 2026 1 - Laiq Ahmad S/o Ajij Ahmad, Aged About 32 Years R/o Mohalla Jawahar Nagar, Mankapur, District Gonda (U.P.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer (S.H.O.), Police Station Newai Bhilai Durg, Tahsil And District - Durg (C.G.) --- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr.Mohd. Naqeeb, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Dy. A.G. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey