Parity warrants grant of bail despite criminal history when prior cases resulted in acquittal.

The applicant sought regular bail for offenses registered under Sections 457, 380, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The prosecution alleged that on the night of July 8, 2022, the applicant and co-accused broke into the complainant’s locked room and stole a box containing jewelry, utensils, and cash valued at approximately Rs. 90,000

The applicant was arrested on March 22, 2024

Counsel for the applicant argued that of his seven criminal antecedents, six resulted in acquittal

Furthermore, it was submitted that co-accused Deepak Goswami and Suraj Goswami had already been granted bail by the High Court in late 2025

The State opposed the bail citing the applicant's criminal history but conceded that his case was identical to that of the co-accused who were granted bail

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, on the grounds of parity and prolonged incarceration

The Court primarily applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which governs the High Court's power to grant regular bail

The underlying offenses were considered under Sections 457, 380, and 34 of the IPC

The Court also referenced procedural safeguards and penalties for bail default under the BNSS, specifically Section 269 (non-appearance), Section 84 (proclamation for person absconding), Section 209 (failure to appear in answer to a proclamation), and Section 351 (recording of statement of accused)

The Court observed that while the applicant had seven criminal antecedents, six had already resulted in acquittals, mitigating the weight of his prior record

Central to the Court’s reasoning was the principle of parity; since the co-accused (Deepak and Suraj Goswami) were granted bail under similar circumstances in MCRC No. 8602/2025 and 9868/2025, the applicant was entitled to the same relief

Additionally, the Court noted that the applicant had been in custody since March 22, 2024, and concluded that the trial was likely to be protracted, justifying his release pending the conclusion of proceedings

The grant of bail was made subject to several conditions: the applicant must not seek unnecessary adjournments, must appear on all trial dates (personally or through counsel) as per Section 269 of BNSS, and must be present for framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 of BNSS

Any violation of these conditions or failure to appear following a proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS would permit the trial court to initiate proceedings under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and revoke bail