Chhattisgarh High Court

HEADLINE: Parity in granting anticipatory bail for similarly situated co-accused in commercial document discrepancy cases under BNS.

AMIT SHARMA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High CourtJUDGMENT: May 08, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The applicant sought anticipatory bail regarding Crime No. 84/2026 registered at Police Station Basna, Mahasamund.

Source reference: p. 1-2

On February 25, 2026, police intercepted two trucks transporting sponge iron under allegedly irregular tax invoices and without proper weighment slips or E-way Bill numbers.

Source reference: para. 2

The applicant was charged under Sections 316(4), 317(2), 318(4), 336(2), 338, 340, and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.

Source reference: para. 1

The applicant contended he was not named in the First Information Report (FIR) and sought parity with a co-accused already granted bail.

Source reference: para. 3
02

Issues

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, based on the principle of parity and the likelihood of a prolonged trial.

Source reference: para. 5
03

Law Applied

Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which governs the High Court's power to grant direction for bail to a person apprehending arrest.

Source reference: para. 1

Principle of parity, noting that a similarly situated co-accused, Abdul Salim, had been granted anticipatory bail by the same Court in M.Cr.C(A) No. 619/2026 on April 24, 2026.

Source reference: para. 5
04

Reasoning

The Court analyzed the facts and circumstances of the case, specifically noting that the applicant’s name was absent from the initial FIR.

Source reference: para. 3

The Court observed that the primary allegations involved procedural irregularities in transport documentation (tax invoices and weighment slips) rather than violent crime.

Source reference: para. 2

The Court applied the doctrine of parity, finding the applicant's situation comparable to co-accused Abdul Salim, who had already been granted relief.

Source reference: para. 5

The Court reasoned that since the trial was expected to take a considerable amount of time to conclude, custodial interrogation or detention was not necessitated at this stage.

Source reference: para. 5
05

Holding

The Court answered the issue in the affirmative and allowed the anticipatory bail application.

The Court held that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released upon executing a personal bond with one surety, subject to several conditions including non-influence of witnesses, appearance on trial dates, and Aadhaar verification.

Source reference: para. 6
Chhattisgarh High Court

Original Court PDF

AMIT SHARMAvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High Court · May 08, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment