Regular bail on parity and completed investigation granted in a documentary fraud case involving bank remittances.

Regular bail was granted in a case of alleged criminal conspiracy, forgery and cheating arising from fraudulent bank remittances because the charge-sheet had been filed, investigation was complete, and the prosecution case was substantially documentary. Applying parity, the Court noted that similarly placed co-accused had already been released on bail and that continued custody should not operate as punitive detention before trial. On those factors, the accused was ordered to be released on bail on terms and conditions, leaving the merits of the prosecution case for trial.

---

---

Issues: Whether the accused was entitled to regular bail in a case alleging criminal conspiracy, forgery and cheating in connection with fraudulent bank remittances.

Analysis: The charge-sheet had been filed and the investigation was complete. The prosecution case rested principally on documentary material. The Court considered that co-accused who were said to have played comparable or greater roles had already been granted bail by the High Court or the Sessions Court. Applying the principle of parity, and keeping in view the length of custody, the nature of evidence, and the settled approach that bail is not to be denied as punitive detention before conviction, the Court found no sufficient reason to continue custody.

Conclusion: The application for regular bail was allowed and the accused was ordered to be released on bail on terms and conditions imposed by the Court.

Final Conclusion: The decision grants bail on parity and completion of investigation, while leaving the merits of the criminal case open for trial.

Ratio Decidendi: Where investigation is complete, the case is substantially documentary, and similarly placed co-accused have been enlarged on bail, parity and the liberty principle may justify release on regular bail even in a serious economic offence.

---