Bail on parity and weak prima facie material granted despite disputed recovery and medical concerns in a corruption case

Bail was granted in a corruption and conspiracy case where parity with a similarly placed co-accused supported release, and the applicant was not shown to have been present at the trap site. The Court treated the alleged recovery from the brother's premises as disputed and found the material raised factual issues better tested at trial. It also considered the applicant's post-Covid lung complications, his conduct during interim bail, and the absence of any demonstrated misuse. A mere apprehension of witness tampering was held insufficient to override these factors.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant was entitled to bail in the corruption and conspiracy case on the basis of parity with the co-accused, lack of prima facie material, doubtful recovery, medical condition, and absence of misuse of interim bail.

Analysis: The Court noted that a co-accused, against whom the prosecution case was materially connected, had already been granted bail. It also found that the applicant was not shown to have been present at the spot at the time of the trap, that the alleged recovery of cash from the brother's premises was disputed, and that the material raised factual questions better left for trial. The applicant's medical condition, including post-Covid lung complications, and his conduct during interim bail were also treated as relevant considerations. The Court further observed that mere apprehension of witness tampering could not outweigh the circumstances favouring release.

Conclusion: Bail was granted to the applicant.

---