Anticipatory bail granted to female accused on grounds of parity and prolonged trial duration.

The Applicant, a 45-year-old woman, filed her first anticipatory bail application apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 61/2026 registered at Police Station Sarangarh

The prosecution alleged that acting on an informant's tip regarding illegal animal skin, police seized 12 kg of raw cow meat from the Applicant

The Applicant contended she was falsely implicated, noting that no material was seized from her possession and that a similarly situated co-accused, Janaki, had already been granted anticipatory bail by the High Court locally on 08.04.2026

The State opposed the bail, citing the Applicant’s two prior criminal antecedents under the Excise Act

1. Whether the Applicant is entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail under the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, given the rule of parity and the nature of the evidence?

The Court applied Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which governs the grant of bail to persons apprehending arrest

Sections 4, 5, and 10 of the Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act, 2004, which prohibit the possession and slaughter of agricultural cattle

The Court also applied the principle of judicial parity, where a similarly situated co-accused has already been granted relief, and considered the socio-legal factor of the Applicant being a woman in the exercise of discretionary relief

The Court evaluated the competing interests of the State and the Applicant's liberty. While the State highlighted the Applicant’s previous criminal history under the Excise Act, the Court found the principle of parity more persuasive, noting that the co-accused (Janaki) was granted bail for the same transaction in M.Cr.C(A) No. 509/2026

The Court observed that the Applicant is a lady and that the trial is likely to take a considerable amount of time to conclude. Taking these factors into account—namely the lack of immediate necessity for custodial interrogation and the precedent set by the co-accused’s order—the Court determined that the Applicant was fit for protection from arrest subject to stringent conditions to ensure cooperation with the trial

It held that in the event of arrest, the Applicant shall be released on bail upon executing a personal bond with one surety to the satisfaction of the arresting officer. The relief was made subject to five conditions: (a) non-interference with witnesses; (b) non-prejudice to a fair trial; (c) appearance on all trial dates; (d) submission of Aadhaar credentials and photographs for verification; and (e) a prohibition against committing similar offences in the future