Grant of parity-based bail where charge-sheet is filed despite the applicant having four criminal antecedents.

The applicant, Komal Sahu, was arrested on 19.11.2025 in connection with Crime No. 1068/2025 at Police Station Kota, Bilaspur.

The prosecution alleged that the applicant intercepted the victim while she was returning from college and attempted to forcibly take her on his motorcycle by grabbing her hand.

The applicant filed this first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), contending that the case arose from a simple dispute due to previous enmity and seeking parity with a co-accused already released on bail.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, primarily on the ground of parity and the completion of judicial investigation.

The court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which governs the power of the High Court or Sessions Court to grant bail.

Substantive charges were considered under Sections 296 (Obscene acts and songs), 351(2) (Criminal intimidation), 74 (Assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), and 3(5) (Joint liability) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

The court also applied the principle of judicial parity, referencing the bail granted to co-accused Nitesh Sahu in MCRC No. 660/2026.

The Court examined the nature and gravity of the offences alongside the applicant’s period of detention since 19/11/2025.

While the State Counsel opposed bail citing four previous criminal antecedents, the Court noted that the applicant provided explanations for these in the application.

Significantly, the Court found that the investigation was effectively complete as the charge-sheet had already been filed.

Applying the principle of parity, the Court determined that since a co-accused (Nitesh Sahu) had been granted bail by the same Court on 24.02.2026, and the trial was expected to take considerable time, the applicant’s continued incarceration was not warranted.

The applicant was ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, subject to several conditions: mandatory attendance on trial dates (specifically for framing charges and recording statements), a prohibition against seeking unnecessary adjournments, and strictly following procedures under Sections 269, 84, and 209 of the BNS/BNSS regarding attendance and potential misuse of liberty.