Regular bail granted on parity where similarly situated co-accused had already been enlarged on bail.

The applicant sought his first application for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, after being arrested in Crime No. 172/2026 registered at Police Station Pithora, District Mahasamund, for offences under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

The prosecution alleged that, on 17 June 2026, a vehicle transporting approximately 23,350 kilograms of Khair wood was intercepted near Pithora and that its driver produced an allegedly forged or invalid NTPS No Objection Certificate to justify the transportation

The applicant claimed false implication and relied on parity, submitting that co-accused Prashant Kumar Bhoi and Achchu Agrawal had already been granted regular bail by the High Court

The State opposed the application but acknowledged that the charge-sheet had been filed and that similarly situated co-accused had been granted bail

The applicant had remained in custody since 11 August 2026

Whether the applicant was entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in view of the completion of investigation and filing of the charge-sheet?

Whether the applicant was entitled to bail on the ground of parity with co-accused persons who had already been granted regular bail by the High Court?

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which empowers the High Court to grant regular bail to an accused in custody.

The Court also applied the principle of parity, under which an accused similarly situated to co-accused already granted bail may ordinarily receive equivalent relief unless distinguishing circumstances exist.

The relevant offences were those punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Bail was subject to statutory and court-imposed conditions governing attendance, non-obstruction of the trial, personal appearance at material stages, and consequences for misuse of liberty

The Court considered the prosecution allegations, the case diary, and the submissions of both parties

Although the applicant was accused of offences relating to the transportation of Khair wood on the basis of an NTPS No Objection Certificate, the investigation had concluded and the charge-sheet had already been filed

The Court further found that the co-accused, Prashant Kumar Bhoi and Achchu Agrawal, had been granted regular bail in connected proceedings and that the State could not dispute their comparable position

Since the applicant had been in custody since 11 August 2026 and the trial was likely to take further time, the Court held that the principle of parity justified granting him regular bail

Bail was granted principally on the ground of parity, along with conditions requiring the applicant not to seek unnecessary adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present on each date fixed by the trial court, to appear personally at the stages of opening of the case, framing of charge, and recording of his statement, and to comply with the consequences prescribed for absence or misuse of bail

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