Grant of bail to co-accused by Supreme Court constitutes a valid ground for parity in second bail application.

The applicant, Kajal Yadav, was arrested on 13.05.2025 in connection with Crime No. 45/2025.

The prosecution alleged that during an investigation into "mule bank accounts" used to convert illegal money into legal tender (cyber fraud) between 01.01.2024 and 11.01.2025, the applicant’s bank account was identified as a vehicle for these illicit transactions.

The applicant filed a first bail application (MCRC No. 10230 of 2025), which was rejected on merits on 11.12.2025 due to the gravity of the offense.

Subsequently, the applicant filed this second bail application on the grounds of parity and the filing of the charge-sheet.

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, based on the principle of parity with co-accused persons granted bail by higher/coordinate courts and the change in circumstances (filing of charge-sheet).

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

The court relied on the principle of parity, noting that identically situated co-accused persons, Bhavika Harchandani and Ayush Jethani, were granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No. 19243/2025 and SLP (Crl.) No. 20651/2025.

It further referenced its own previous order in MCRC No. 884 of 2026, where co-accused Nitish Kumar was granted bail based on the Supreme Court's precedents.

The court also considered procedural compliance under Sections 269, 84, 209, and 351 of the BNSS/BNS framework.

The Court acknowledged that while the initial bail plea was rejected due to the serious nature of cyber fraud involving mule accounts.

Specifically, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had granted bail to other co-accused persons involved in the same transaction.

The Court observed that the applicant had been in custody since May 2025 and that the investigation had concluded with the filing of the charge-sheet.

By applying the doctrine of parity, the Court reasoned that since identically situated individuals were already released, continued incarceration of the applicant was no longer warranted, provided stringent conditions were imposed to ensure trial participation.

The holding was predicated on the grant of bail to co-accused by the Supreme Court and the completion of the charge-sheet.

The release is subject to specific conditions, including a prohibition on seeking unnecessary adjournments, compulsory attendance on all trial dates (unless excused), and strict penalties for misuse of liberty under Sections 209 and 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.