Chhattisgarh High Court

Grant of bail on grounds of parity where co-accused with worse criminal history were previously released.

RAVISHANKAR MARKAM vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High CourtJUDGMENT: April 21, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The applicant filed a second bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), seeking regular bail

Source reference: para. 1

On 21.10.2024, police apprehended co-accused Shrishti Kurrey with 150 ampules of Buprenorphine

Source reference: para. 2

Investigation led to co-accused Vikrant Sarkar, who was found with 22,752 Tramadol tablets and 4,000 Buprenorphine ampules

Source reference: para. 2

The applicant was arrested on 24.10.2024 for allegedly being part of the supply chain

Source reference: para. 3

His first bail application was rejected on 03.01.2025 due to the commercial quantity of the seizure

Source reference: para. 6

The applicant moved this second application citing the principle of parity, as co-accused Naveen Idwani and Sandeep Kumar Chhabda (who has 11 criminal antecedents) were granted bail by the Supreme Court and High Court respectively

Source reference: para. 3-4
02

Issues

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail on the grounds of parity and lack of criminal antecedents despite the recovery of a commercial quantity of contraband

Source reference: para. 3 & 6
03

Law Applied

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) regarding bail

Source reference: para. 1

Sections 21 and 22 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985

Source reference: para. 1

The doctrine of parity in bail jurisprudence, referencing the Supreme Court’s order in Naveen Idwani v. State (Criminal Appeal No. 332 of 2026) and its own previous order regarding co-accused Sandeep Kumar Chhabda

Source reference: para. 3-4

Procedural conditions for bail were regulated under Sections 269, 84, and 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Section 351 of the BNSS

Source reference: para. 8
04

Reasoning

The court noted that while the initial rejection was based on the "huge commercial quantity" of the narcotics and the applicant’s alleged role in the supply chain, new circumstances warranted a reconsideration.

Source reference: para. 6

The court observed that the Supreme Court had granted bail to co-accused Naveen Idwani on 19.01.2026

Source reference: para. 4

the court highlighted that another co-accused, Sandeep Kumar Chhabda, was granted bail on 01.04.2026 despite having 11 criminal antecedents

Source reference: para. 4 & 6

The court reasoned that since the present applicant has no criminal antecedents, his case stands on a "better" footing than that of the co-accused already released.

Source reference: para. 3 & 6

Given that the charge-sheet has already been filed and the applicant has been in custody since October 2024, the court found continued detention unnecessary

Source reference: para. 3 & 6
05

Holding

The lack of criminal antecedents and the grant of bail to similarly or worse-situated co-accused justified the relief

The court allowed the application and ordered the release of Ravishankar Markam on regular bail upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties

Source reference: para. 7-8

Case disposed

Source reference: para. 9
Chhattisgarh High Court

Original Court PDF

RAVISHANKAR MARKAMvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High Court · April 21, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment