Grant of parity-based bail to elderly applicant despite criminal antecedents and recovery of stolen property.

The applicant filed a first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

He was arrested on 02.01.2026 in connection with a theft involving 22 BSNL tower cells valued at ₹1,60,000, allegedly committed on 07.03.2024.

The prosecution charged him under Sections 380, 457, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated due to a dispute with police officials, that the FIR was delayed by a month, and that the main accused, Akhilesh Dubey, had already been granted bail by the trial court.

The State opposed bail, citing the recovery of stolen property and the applicant’s 15 criminal antecedents.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail despite criminal antecedents, on the grounds of parity with the co-accused and his advanced age.

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

Sections 380 (theft in dwelling house), 457 (lurking house-trespass/house-breaking), and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Principle of parity in bail, where a similarly situated co-accused has been released, and the principle that criminal antecedents alone are not an absolute bar to bail if they are sufficiently explained.

While acknowledging the State’s concern regarding 15 criminal antecedents, the Court noted that these were explained in a covering memo and many had been disposed of.

The Court emphasized that the main accused, Akhilesh Dubey, had already been enlarged on bail by the trial court, establishing a ground for parity.

The Court took judicial notice of the applicant’s age (65 years), his period of incarceration since January 2026, and the fact that the charge-sheet had already been submitted, making further pretrial detention unnecessary as the trial would likely take time to conclude.

The applicant was ordered to be released on regular bail upon furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties, subject to conditions including: (i) an undertaking not to seek unnecessary adjournments; (ii) mandatory presence on all hearing dates; and (iii) compliance with Section 269 and 209 of the BNS in case of default.

The Court held that despite the allegations, the combination of the applicant's age, the filing of the charge-sheet, and parity with the co-accused justified his release.