The principle of parity in bail decisions necessitates granting bail to similarly situated co-accused, especially when no active role in the alleged crime is established.

Headnote:(A) IPC - Sections 406, 409, 420, and 120B - Bail application under Section 483 of BNSS - Petitioner arrested in connection with FIR for serious offences - Co-accused previously granted bail, and petitioner is similarly situated - No active role established in the alleged crime, and trial likely to be lengthy. (Paras 2, 6, 7)

(B) Bail - Considerations for granting bail - The court must balance the seriousness of allegations against the accused with the principle of parity among co-accused granted bail. (Paras 4, 6)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, arrested under FIR No.255/2014 for serious IPC offences, argues for bail based on the release of co-accused, asserting no distinct role in the crime. (Paras 2, 3)

Findings of Court:
The court, acknowledging the bail granted to co-accused and the absence of active participation by the petitioner, allows the bail application. (Paras 6, 7)

Issues: The main issues included the parity principle in bail and the seriousness of allegations against the petitioner. (Paras 4, 6)

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the similarity of circumstances among co-accused necessitates equal treatment in bail decisions, and that trial delays can warrant bail. (Paras 6)

Result: Bail application allowed.

Order :

1. This application for bail under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.255/2014 registered at Police Station Sanchore, District Jalore, for offences under Sections 409, 420, 406 and 120B of the IPC.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the co-accused Heer Singh (S. B . Cr. Misc. B ail Application No.4536/2016), Ratan Singh (S. B . Cr. Misc. B ail Application NO.11368/2018) and B hanwar Singh (S. B . Cr. Misc. B ail Application No.15690/2024) have already been enlarged on bail vide orders dated 19.05.2016, 16.11.2018 and 18.12.2024 respectively. Learned counsel submitted that since the similarly situated co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail and the case of the present petitioner is not distinguishable from that of the above named co-accused persons, the petitioner also deserves to be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel submitted that the offences alleged to have been committed by the petitioner are triable by a Court of Magistrate and there is noting on record to show that the petitioner has played an active role in commission of the alleged crime.

3. Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody and the trial of the case is likely to consume sufficiently long time. On these grounds, he implored the Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and submitted that as many as 20 cases of similar nature are pending against the petitioner and therefore, looking to the seriousness of allegations against the petitioner, she does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. However, he was not in position to refute the fact that the above named co-accused have already been enlarged on bail.

5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.

6. Having considered the rival submissions, facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that similarly situated co-accused have already been enlarged on bail, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483 of BNSS is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner Ram Kanwar W/o Shri Heer Singh arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.255/2014 registered at Police Station Sanchore, District Jalore, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case, provided she furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of learned trial court, for her appearance before that court on each & every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till completion of the trial.

8. It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document