The court held that an applicant is entitled to bail on the ground of parity if a similarly situated co-accused with a similar or worse criminal record has already been granted bail by the court.

Order on Board

1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 223/2026 registered at Police Station Tilda-Nevra, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, for the offences punishable under Sections 296 , 126(2), 324(4), 311 and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, the complainant lodged a report before the concerned Police Station alleging that on the date of the incident, a dispute arose between the accused persons and the complainant regarding the alleged illegal stopping of a truck. It is alleged that thereafter, the accused persons damaged the truck, looted approximately 30 litres of diesel valued at ₹3,000/- and cash amounting to ₹25,500/-, abused the complainant in filthy language, threatened him with dire consequences and assaulted him. On the basis of the said report, the aforesaid crime was registered against the applicant and other co-accused persons. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the applicant has been implicated on account of the same incident in connection with Crime No. 222/2026 registered at the same Police Station. He further submits that the complainant, Gokul Goswami, has already filed a no-objection application along with an afÏdavit before the learned trial Court stating that no such incident had taken place between him, his driver Mahesh Kumar Banjare and the accused persons and that they have no objection if the applicant is released on bail. He further submits that no prima facie material is available against the applicant and the allegations are false. He also submits that the applicant has two criminal antecedents pertaining to the years 2025 and 2026, both of which are still pending at the stage of framing of charge, as duly explained in Part-D of the present bail application. He further submits that a similarly situated co-accused, namely Vishal Chhablani, having three criminal antecedents, has already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 7070/2026 vide order dated 04.08.2026. Therefore, on the ground of parity also, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature. He further submits that the applicant has two criminal antecedents, both of which are pending at the stage of framing of charge. However, he could not dispute the fact that similarly situated co-accused Vishal Chhablani has already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 7070/2026 vide order dated 04.08.2026, despite having three criminal antecedents.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicant is in custody since 24.05.2026, the applicant has two criminal antecedents of the years 2025 and 2026, both of which are pending at the stage of framing of charge and have been duly explained in the bail application of part-D and further considering that a similarly situated co-accused Vishal Chhablani, who was also having three criminal antecedents, has already been