Bail granted on parity where accused’s involvement was limited to recovery of cash from alleged conspiracy.

The applicant filed a second bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, following the rejection of his first application on February 27, 2026

The prosecution alleged that on October 14, 2025, the main accused, Suresh Thakur, set fire to his in-laws' house using petrol and firecrackers, resulting in the death of his father-in-law and injuries to his mother-in-law

The applicant was arrested on October 21, 2025, after a memorandum statement was recorded and ₹3,000 was seized from him, allegedly received for hiding a bag, gun, and bullets for the main accused

The applicant contended he was falsely implicated, his name was absent from the dying declaration, and co-accused persons had already been granted bail

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail on the grounds of parity and prolonged trial duration under the provisions of the BNSS

Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which governs the power of the High Court or Court of Session regarding bail

Principle of Parity, whereby an accused may be granted bail if similarly situated co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail

The principle that a deprivation of liberty is not warranted when the trial is unlikely to conclude in the near future and the applicant has undergone significant incarceration

The Court examined the applicant's role relative to the main accused and noted that his name did not appear in the deceased's dying declaration

While the State argued that the recovery of ₹3,000 linked the applicant to the crime for assisting the main accused in hiding weapons, the Court observed that two other co-accused persons (Natka @ Dilkhush Sardar and Aditya Kumar Das) had already been granted bail in March and April 2026

The Court found that the applicant’s case stood on the same footing as those co-accused

Furthermore, noting that only 9 out of 51 witnesses had been examined since the applicant’s arrest in October 2025, the Court reasoned that the trial would take considerable time to conclude, justifying the exercise of discretion in favor of the applicant

The Court held that the applicant deserved the benefit of bail based on parity and the slow progress of the trial

The applicant was ordered to be released on a personal bond of ₹20,000 with one solvent surety of the like sum, subject to the satisfaction of the Trial Court