Regular bail granted on ground of parity where similarly situated co-accused have been released.

The applicant, an Assistant Statistical Officer in the Office of the Regional Deputy Commissioner of Land Records, Raipur, was arrested on 20.11.2025 in connection with Crime No. 64/2025

The prosecution alleges that during the Revenue Inspector Departmental Promotion Examination (2024), held on 16.01.2025, the applicant and co-accused committed irregularities involving typographical errors, question paper setting, and tampering of seals

Following an inquiry by a five-member committee, an FIR was registered on 17.11.2025 for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 7(C) of the Prevention of Corruption Act

The applicant sought regular bail after the filing of the charge-sheet

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) on the grounds of parity with co-accused and the prolonged nature of the trial

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

It relied on the Principle of Parity, noting that similarly situated co-accused (Virendra Jatav, Leena Dewangan, and Premlata Padmakar) had been granted regular or anticipatory bail

The Court further considered procedural mandates under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and BNSS regarding court attendance (Section 269 BNS, Section 84 BNSS, Section 209 BNS, and Section 351 BNSS) as conditions for the continued liberty of the applicant

The Court observed that the investigation was substantially complete as the charge-sheet had already been filed

It highlighted that the State could not dispute that the applicant’s role and circumstances were identical to those of co-accused Virendra Jatav, who was granted regular bail on 13.03.2026, and other co-accused granted anticipatory bail

The Court took into account that the applicant had no prior criminal record and had been incarcerated since 20.11.2025

Given that the trial was expected to take considerable time to conclude, the Court reasoned that further detention was unnecessary, provided stringent conditions were imposed to ensure the applicant's presence during trial proceedings

The Court held that the applicant was entitled to bail on the ground of parity

The release is subject to specific conditions: the applicant must not seek unnecessary adjournments, must be present on every date of the hearing (either personally or through counsel), and must appear in person for framing of charges and recording of statements

Failure to comply may result in proceedings for abuse of liberty under the BNS and BNSS