Regular bail granted on parity after charge-sheet filing despite the applicant’s criminal antecedents.

The applicant was arrested in connection with Crime No. 399/2026 registered at Police Station Civil Line, Bilaspur, for offences under Sections 331(3), 305(A) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”).

The prosecution alleged that unknown persons had committed theft of cash amounting to ₹16,000 and articles worth ₹3,000 from the complainant’s pan masala shop.

During investigation, the applicant was arrested on the basis of a memorandum statement.

The applicant contended that he had been implicated only on suspicion, that no stolen property had been recovered from him, and that the offences were not made out.

He disclosed eight criminal antecedents, of which two BNS cases were pending and the remaining cases had been disposed of.

The charge-sheet had been filed.

A co-accused, Avinash Ratre, had already been granted bail by the High Court on the ground relied upon for parity.

The applicant’s earlier bail application had been dismissed because Registry defects had not been cured, and not on merits.

Whether the applicant should be released on regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in view of the filing of the charge-sheet and the circumstances of the alleged offence.

Whether the applicant was entitled to bail on the ground of parity with co-accused Avinash Ratre, who had already been granted bail.

Whether the applicant’s criminal antecedents disentitled him from bail, despite his explanation that only two cases were presently pending.

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, governing the High Court’s power to grant regular bail.

The alleged offences were those under Sections 331(3), 305(A) and 3(5) of the BNS.

The Court considered the settled bail principles requiring assessment of the nature of the accusation, the stage of investigation, the filing of the charge-sheet, the applicant’s criminal antecedents, and the possibility of parity with similarly placed co-accused.

The principle of parity permits bail where a co-accused in comparable circumstances has already been granted bail, subject to an independent assessment of the applicant’s circumstances.

The Court noted that the charge-sheet had already been filed, reducing the immediate need for custodial interrogation.

It also considered that the applicant’s implication was based on a memorandum statement, with no alleged recovery of stolen articles from him, as submitted by the defence.

Although the applicant had eight criminal antecedents, the Court took into account the explanation furnished in the bail application and the fact that only two BNS cases were pending, while the remaining cases had been disposed of.

Most significantly, the co-accused Avinash Ratre had already been granted regular bail by the High Court in MCRC No. 7028 of 2026.

On the overall facts and circumstances, the Court found the applicant entitled to the benefit of parity.

The bail was subject to conditions requiring him not to seek adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present before the trial court, to comply with proceedings arising from any misuse of bail or failure to appear pursuant to proclamation, and to appear personally on the dates fixed for opening of the case, framing of charge, and recording of his statement under Section 351 of the BNSS.

A certified copy of the order was directed to be sent to the trial court for compliance.