Grant of regular bail on ground of parity where identically situated co-accused have been previously enlarged on bail.

The applicant, Ajay Dhivar, was arrested on January 27, 2026, in connection with Crime No. 56/2026 registered at Police Station Kharora.

During patrolling, police received information regarding the illegal possession of liquor for sale. Acting on this tip, authorities seized 181.440 liters of country-made and foreign liquor from an open area.

The applicant failed to produce valid documentation for the seized spirits.

The applicant moved for regular bail before the High Court of Chhattisgarh on grounds of parity with co-accused persons and lack of criminal antecedents.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for an offense under the Chhattisgarh Excise Act.

2. Whether the principle of parity applies given that identically situated co-accused persons were previously granted bail.

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

Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, which provides for a minimum punishment of one year and a maximum of three years for illegal possession/sale of liquor.

Principle of Parity in criminal jurisprudence, referencing its own prior order in MCRC No. 1921 of 2026 dated April 15, 2026, where co-accused Haleshwar Sahu and Chandrashekhar Sahu were granted relief.

Procedural compliance under Sections 269, 84, 209, and 351 of the BNSS.

The Court evaluated the nature and gravity of the allegations alongside the duration of the applicant’s pretrial detention, noting he had been in jail since January 27, 2026.

Although the State opposed the bail on the grounds that the charge-sheet had not yet been filed, the prosecution could not dispute that the applicant was identically situated to the co-accused persons who had already been released by the Court.

The Court reasoned that since the primary allegations and the nature of the recovery were similar to those in MCRC No. 1921 of 2026, denying bail to the present applicant would violate the principle of parity.

Lack of criminal antecedents served as a mitigating factor in favor of the applicant.

The application was allowed, and the Court ordered the release of Ajay Dhivar upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, subject to strict conditions including mandatory presence on trial dates and personal appearance for framing of charges.