Bail granted on parity where the applicant's role is distinguishable from the main accused.

The applicant filed a first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, following his arrest on 15.01.2026.

The prosecution alleged that the victim was married to the co-accused, Hemant Kumar Agrawal, but had returned to her mother’s home due to unwillingness to reside with him.

On 19.11.2025, Hemant Agrawal and his associates (including the applicant) allegedly arrived at the complainant’s residence, assaulted her, and forcibly took the victim to Raipur.

Consequently, an FIR was registered under various sections of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

The applicant argued that his role was distinguishable from the main accused (Hemant) and sought parity with another co-accused already granted bail.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS based on the principle of parity and the stage of the trial.

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which governs the High Court's power to grant bail.

Substantive offences were considered under Sections 115(2), 85, 64(2)(m), 138, 351(3), and 89 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

The principle of judicial parity, referencing its own prior order in Arun Sagarwanshi v. State of Chhattisgarh (MCRC No. 1673 of 2026), where a similarly situated co-accused was enlarged on bail.

The court observed that while Hemant Kumar Agrawal is identified as the main accused, the applicant’s role is distinguishable from his.

It noted that the State Counsel could not dispute that a co-accused, Arun Sagarwanshi, whose situation was identical to the applicant’s, had already been granted bail by the same Court.

The court further highlighted that the applicant had been in custody since 15.01.2026 and that the charge-sheet had already been filed.

Reasoning that the conclusion of the trial would take a considerable amount of time, the court found that the applicant had made out a case for release on bail on the grounds of parity and the procedural status of the litigation.

The applicant was entitled to bail on the ground of parity as the investigation was complete and the trial was expected to be prolonged.

The release was made subject to several conditions, including a prohibition on seeking unnecessary adjournments, a mandate to appear at all trial dates (subject to Section 269 BNS for absence), and mandatory personal appearance during the framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 of the BNSS.