Grant of Regular Bail on Grounds of Parity and Completion of Investigation for BNS Offences

The applicants filed a first bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, following their arrest in connection with Crime No. 0141/2026.

The prosecution alleged that on March 3, 2026, the applicants demanded liquor money from the complainant, Sanjay Mandavi, and upon refusal, assaulted him and his family with wooden sticks and fibre canes.

The applicants contended they were falsely implicated, asserting that the complainant (who has criminal antecedents) initiated the quarrel and that Applicant No. 1 himself sustained head injuries.

It was further argued that a co-accused, Vishakha, had already been granted bail and that the victims’ injuries were not life-threatening, as they were discharged from the hospital within five days.

1. Whether the applicants are entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, based on the principle of parity and the nature of the allegations.

Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the grant of regular bail.

The Court considered the doctrine of parity, wherein an accused may be granted bail if a similarly situated co-accused has already been released.

Sections 296 (Obscene acts), 351(3) (Criminal intimidation), 109(1) (Abetment), 119(1) (Voluntarily causing hurt), and 3(5) (Common intention) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

The Court evaluated the case by weighing the progress of the investigation against the duration of the applicants' incarceration. It noted that the charge-sheet had already been submitted, and the applicants had been in custody since March and May 2026.

The Court placed significant weight on the fact that a co-accused, Vishakha, had been granted regular bail via MCRC No. 3303 of 2026 on June 16, 2026.

The Court also took into account the submission that the incident arose from a sudden quarrel rather than premeditated intent, the "general and omnibus" nature of the allegations, and the fact that the trial was expected to take considerable time to conclude.

The Court ordered the release of Anand Sonkar and Firoza @ Simran on furnishing personal bonds and two sureties each. The holding was subject to stringent conditions, including mandatory appearance at trial, a prohibition on seeking adjournments during witness testimony, and potential revocation under Section 209 or 269 of the BNS/BNSS in case of default or misuse of liberty.