Accused entitled to regular bail on ground of parity with similarly situated co-accused.

The applicant, Ravi Manjhi, was arrested on 14.07.2025 in connection with Crime No. 397/2025 for offenses punishable under Sections 317(4), 318(4), and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023

This is the applicant’s second bail application; the first was rejected on merits by the High Court on 27.10.2025, and a subsequent SLP before the Supreme Court was dismissed on 17.12.2025

The applicant sought bail on the grounds that a similarly situated co-accused, Amit Mishra, was granted bail on 18.03.2026, the charge-sheet has been filed, and five out of nine prosecution witnesses have already been examined

The applicant has no prior criminal history

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, on the ground of parity with a co-accused, despite a prior rejection on merits

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the High Court's power to grant bail

It relied on the judicial principle of parity, which dictates that similarly situated accused persons should be granted similar relief unless distinguishing factors exist

The Court also referenced procedural mandates under Sections 209 and 269 of the BNS and Section 351 of the BNSS to ensure the integrity of the trial process during the period of bail

The Court balanced the gravity of the allegations and the previous dismissal of the applicant's bail on merits against the current stage of the trial and the status of the co-accused

It noted that the investigation is complete, the charge-sheet has been filed, and the applicant has been incarcerated for approximately nine months

Crucially, the Court found that since a similarly situated co-accused had been granted bail, the applicant was entitled to the same benefit based on the principle of parity

The Court determined that continued detention was unnecessary provided that strict conditions were imposed to prevent the misuse of liberty and to ensure the applicant's presence during crucial trial stages, such as the framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 of the BNSS

The applicant was ordered to be released upon furnishing a personal bond with two heavy sureties

The Court imposed several conditions, including a prohibition on seeking adjournments when witnesses are present and a mandate to appear at all key trial proceedings

Finally, the Court directed the trial court to endeavor to conclude the trial within four months