Anticipatory bail granted on grounds of parity to landlord implicated solely via co-accused memorandum statements.

The Applicant, a 59-year-old landlord, sought anticipatory bail regarding Crime No. 84/2026 involving the interception of two trucks carrying sponge iron.

While proceedings were initiated against the truck drivers, the Applicant was not named in the FIR, and no aggrieved party had reported theft or loss.

The Applicant’s sole connection to the case was as the owner of an open land/godown leased to M/s Jai Bhole Ispat under a valid rent agreement.

He was implicated during the investigation solely based on the memorandum statements of co-accused persons.

1. Whether the Applicant is entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail based on the lack of direct involvement and the principle of parity with co-accused persons who have already received protection.

Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which governs the power of the High Court to grant anticipatory bail.

The evidentiary value of memorandum statements, noting they are generally inadmissible without independent corroborative material.

Doctrine of parity, ensuring consistent legal treatment for similarly situated co-accused individuals who had already been granted stay on arrest or bail under CRMP No. 986 of 2026 and MCRC No. 3228 of 2026.

The Court examined the nature and gravity of the allegations, noting that the Applicant had no role in the business operations, billing, or transportation activities of the firm leasing his land.

It observed that the prosecution's case against the Applicant rested entirely on inadmissible memorandum statements of co-accused persons.

Crucially, the Court found that the Applicant was similarly situated to co-accused Ashok Kumar Gupta, Mohammad Shahajada, and Tarak Ghosh, all of whom had already been granted judicial relief.

Given the lack of cogent material linking the Applicant to the alleged offenses under Sections 316(4), 317(2), 318(4), 336(2), 338, 340 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), the Court determined that the benefit of parity was applicable.

The Court held that in the event of arrest, the Applicant shall be released on bail upon executing a personal bond with one surety.

This relief was granted subject to conditions: the Applicant must not influence witnesses, must attend all trial dates, must submit Aadhaar verification, and must not involve himself in similar future offenses.