Ajay Sharma vs State Of Uttar Pradesh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(SC) 1484

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
DIPANKAR DATTA AND PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, JJ.
Ajay Sharma – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 56 of 2025 [Arising Out of SLP(Crl.) No. 17928 of 2024] with Criminal Appeal Nos. 57-59 of 2025 [Arising Out of SLP(Crl.) Nos. 18296-18298 of 2024]; Criminal Appeal Nos. 60-62 of 2025 [Arising Out of SLP(Crl.) No. 17969-17971 of 2024]; Criminal Appeal Nos. 63 of 2025 [Arising Out of SLP(Crl.) No. 17943 of 2024]; Criminal Appeal Nos. 64 of 2025 [Arising Out of SLP(Crl.) No. 17967 of 2024]
Decided on : 03-01-2025

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Sections 439 - Bail - The High Court rejected applications for bail for the appellants, however, other co-accused were granted bail by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court found that the appellants were in a similar position and thus entitled to similar relief. (Paras 4-5)

(B) The principle of parity in granting bail as established by precedent in previous cases is acknowledged, ensuring equal treatment under similar circumstances. (Paras 4-5)

Facts of the case:
The appellants faced criminal charges and sought bail, which was denied by the High Court but granted to several co-accused previously.

Findings of Court:
The Supreme Court decided to grant bail to the appellants on the same terms as those co-accused who were previously granted bail.

Issues: The main issue was whether the appellants were to be granted bail in light of co-accused being granted bail earlier.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the principle of parity, ruling in favor of the appellants given their similar circumstances to those already granted bail.

Result: Appeals allowed.

Table of Content
1. rejection of bail by high court (Para 1 , 2)
2. hearing of parties' counsel (Para 3 , 4)
3. granting bail under similar circumstances (Para 5)
4. setting aside of previous judgments (Para 6)
5. allowing appeals and disposing pending applications (Para 7 , 8)

ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. The High Court by the impugned judgment(s) and order(s) has rejected the appellants' prayers for bail.

3. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

4. It has been brought to our notice that several co-accused have been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 25th October, 2024 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 4410-4412/2024.

5. Since the appellants stand on the same footing, we are also inclined to grant bail to the appellants on the same terms and conditions as imposed by the order dated 25th October, 2024. Ordered accordingly.

6. The impugned judgment(s) and order(s) stand(s) set aside.

7. The appeals are, accordingly, allowed on the aforesaid terms.

8. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document