Bail granted to salesman based on parity and completion of investigation in liquor embezzlement case.

The applicant, a salesman at the English Composite Liquor Shop in Bacheli, was arrested on January 6, 2026, following a surprise inspection on November 25, 2025

The inspection revealed a stock shortage of ₹92,09,370 and a failure to deposit ₹60,38,404 from sales, totaling an alleged misappropriation of ₹1,52,47,774 between October 1, 2025, and November 24, 2025

The applicant moved the High Court for regular bail, arguing false implication, lack of criminal antecedents, and parity with four co-accused persons already granted bail

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, based on the principle of parity and the stage of the investigation

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, governing the grant of regular bail

It adhered to the principle of parity in bail matters, citing previous orders in MCRC Nos. 10419/2025, 1554/2026, 1754/2026, and 3041/2026, where identically situated co-accused were released

The Court also considered the penal provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), specifically Sections 316(5) (Criminal breach of trust by public servant/banker/merchant/agent), 336(3) (Forgery), 318 (Cheating), 338 (Forgery of valuable security), 340 (Falsification of accounts), 61 (Criminal conspiracy), and 3(5) (Common intention)

The Court balanced the gravity of the offense—involving a substantial financial loss of over ₹1.52 crore—against the procedural status and the applicant's profile.

It noted that the applicant had been in detention since January 6, 2026, and that the investigation was nearing a trial stage as the charge-sheet had already been filed

Crucially, the Court found that the applicant's role was identical to four other co-accused (Ankit Tiwari, Deepak Yadav, Devendra Kumar Paikra, and Ajay Kumar Sharma) who had already been granted bail by the same Court between January and April 2026

Given the absence of criminal antecedents and the likelihood that the trial would consume significant time, the Court determined that continued incarceration was unnecessary

The applicant was ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions: (i) no seeking of adjournments during witness presence; (ii) mandatory appearance on all trial dates unless excused; (iii) liability under BNS Section 209 for failure to appear; and (iv) mandatory personal appearance for framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 BNSS