Anticipatory bail granted to property broker on grounds of parity and amicable settlement between parties.

The applicant sought anticipatory bail regarding Crime No. 20/2026 registered at P.S. Saraswati Nagar for alleged financial fraud.

The prosecution alleged that the accused persons induced a complainant company into an Agreement to Sell for an immovable property, receiving approximately Rs. 11.51 crores while suppressing the fact that the property was mortgaged and subject to Debt Recovery Tribunal proceedings.

The applicant contended he was merely a broker, not a director or seller, and received no financial benefit.

It was further noted that the dispute was amicably compromised and co-accused persons had already been granted bail.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail under the principle of parity and the nature of his involvement in the alleged offence.

The court applied Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which governs the grant of anticipatory bail.

The court also relied on the principle of Parity, whereby an applicant may be granted bail if similarly situated co-accused have already been granted relief.

The underlying legal considerations included the nature and gravity of the accusation, the absence of criminal antecedents, and whether custodial interrogation was necessary for the investigation.

The Court examined the applicant's specific role, noting the defense's argument that he acted solely as a broker and was not a signatory to the sale agreement nor a recipient of the funds.

A significant factor in the court's reasoning was the settlement of the dispute between the parties, as evidenced by the bail orders of the co-accused.

The Court found that since the primary accused (the Tekriwals) were granted regular bail and another co-accused (Vinod Bajorai) was granted anticipatory bail, the applicant was entitled to parity.

Furthermore, observing that the offences were not punishable by death or life imprisonment and that the applicant had no criminal history, the Court determined custodial interrogation was not required.

It held that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail upon executing a personal bond and one surety.

The holding was subject to conditions: the applicant must not influence witnesses, must appear for all trial dates, must provide Aadhaar verification, and must not commit further offences.