Bail granted to truck drivers based on parity with co-accused granted relief by Apex Court.

The three applicants, all truck drivers, were arrested on 10.02.2026 in connection with Crime No. 14/2026

The prosecution alleged that ten individuals were involved in the illegal transportation and hoarding of paddy from other states into Chhattisgarh for local consumption, in violation of Collector orders

During a checking operation on NH-53, authorities seized six trucks containing paddy valued at ₹1,46,90,800/-

The applicants sought regular bail, arguing parity with a co-accused, Vishnu Agrawal, who was granted relief by the Supreme Court

Whether the applicants are entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) based on the principle of parity and the duration of their incarceration.

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) regarding the power of the High Court to grant bail

Sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, which regulate the production, supply, and distribution of essential commodities

The Court also referenced procedural penal provisions under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), specifically Sections 209, 269, and 84, to govern the conditions of the bail

The court relied on the principle of parity following the Supreme Court’s order in Special Leave to Appeal No. 4903/2026, which granted relief to a co-accused in the same crime

The Court evaluated the application by focusing on two primary factors: parity and the period of detention.

The Court observed that the primary co-accused, Vishnu Agrawal, whose anticipatory bail had initially been rejected by the High Court, was subsequently granted relief by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 23.03.2026

Since the State counsel could not dispute that the case of the present applicants was similar to that of the co-accused who received relief, the Court determined that continued incarceration was unnecessary

The Court balanced the grant of liberty with strict conditions to ensure the applicants' presence during trial and to prevent the abuse of bail

The Court ordered their release upon furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties each, contingent upon several conditions, including: (i) an undertaking not to seek unnecessary adjournments; (ii) mandatory presence on all trial dates unless excused; and (iii) strict compliance with Sections 209, 269, and 351 of the BNSS/BNS regarding court appearances and framing of charges