Parity with co-accused and absence of criminal antecedents justify grant of bail post-investigation.

The complainant, Puleshwar Verma, alleged that on 03.01.2026, he was intercepted and assaulted with a knife by co-accused Sahettar Lal Sahu following a dispute regarding the local Sarpanch.

When the complainant and his family attempted to travel to the police station to lodge a report, the applicants (Vijay Sahu and Daras Yadav), along with other individuals, allegedly intercepted them near the house of Sammelal Sahu, assaulted them with clubs, and obstructed them from reporting the incident.

Consequently, Crime No. 06/2026 was registered for various offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

The applicants were arrested on 08.01.2026, and the police have since filed the charge-sheet.

The applicants moved this first bail application under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

1. Whether the applicants are entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, in light of the completion of the investigation and the principle of parity with co-accused.

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 substantive charges were brought under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), including Sections 126(2) (wrongful restraint), 191(2) & 191(3) (rioting), 190 (unlawful assembly), 118(1) (voluntarily causing hurt), 109(1) (attempt to murder), and 61(2) (criminal conspiracy).

The Court also relied on the judicial principle of parity, ensuring that similarly situated accused persons receive equal treatment regarding liberty.

The Court balanced the gravity of the allegations—forming an unlawful assembly and using violence to obstruct a complainant—against the procedural status of the case.

It noted that the applicants had been in detention since 08.01.2026 and that the investigation was concluded with the filing of the charge-sheet.

A pivotal factor in the Court's reasoning was that a co-accused, Bhagirathi Yadav, whose role was identical to that of the present applicants, had already been granted bail by the same Court on 08.04.2026 in MCRC No. 3113 of 2026.

Finding no criminal antecedents recorded against the applicants and acknowledging that the trial would consume significant time, the Court determined that continued incarceration was unnecessary.

The applicants were ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each, subject to strict conditions: they must not seek adjournments during evidence, must appear at every trial date (punishable under Section 269 of BNS for failure), and must comply with all procedural requirements under Sections 84 and 209 of the BNSS/BNS regarding presence and proclamations.