Bail granted on grounds of parity and avoidance of prolonged pre-trial detention under BNSS.

On January 26, 2026, during a wedding reception at Manthan Banquet, Gwalior, a handbag belonging to the complainant’s wife was stolen while she was posing for photographs.

The bag contained an iPhone 16 Pro, diamond jewelry, cash, and debit/credit cards.

Following an investigation into Crime No. 22/2026, the applicant was arrested on February 2, 2026.

The applicant moved the High Court for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), contending false implication and seeking parity with a co-accused who had already been released.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 483 of the BNSS on the grounds of parity with a co-accused and the expected duration of the trial.

2. Whether continued pre-trial detention is warranted when the applicant is a permanent resident and there is no prima facie independent material to connect him to the crime.

The court primarily applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which governs the power of the High Court or Court of Session to grant bail.

It adhered to the legal principle of parity, ensuring consistency in judicial orders for similarly situated co-accused.

Furthermore, the court applied the doctrine that prolonged pre-trial detention is an "anathema to the concept of liberty," emphasizing that bail should be the rule when a trial is unlikely to conclude expeditiously.

The charges involved sections 303(2), 238, 61(2), 317(2), and 95 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

The Court evaluated the merits of the application by balancing the nature of the allegations against the applicant’s right to liberty.

It noted that the co-accused, Savant Sisodiya, had already been granted bail by a coordinate Bench on March 13, 2026, thereby establishing a strong case for parity.

The Court observed that the trial was not likely to conclude in the near future and that the applicant, being a permanent resident of District Rajgarh, did not pose a significant flight risk.

It further reasoned that the applicant’s undertaking to cooperate with the trial and refrain from tampering with evidence mitigated the State's concerns regarding the integrity of the judicial process.

The holding was based on the principles of parity and the avoidance of unnecessary pre-trial detention.

The release is subject to specific conditions, including the applicant’s presence at all trial proceedings, a prohibition on committing further offenses, and a restriction on leaving India without prior court permission.

Failure to comply with these conditions will result in the automatic cancellation of the bail order.