TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 471
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e at Allahabad. 3. A perusal of the First Information Report [FIR for short] reveals that the genesis of the instant proceedings was a verbal spat between the appellant-complainant and one Suresh Pal and his son Aditya, who were his co-villagers. The former's father, Sonveer, opposed the escalation of the dispute, resulting in threats from the latter. On the day of lodging of the FIR, while the appellant- complainant and his parents were, for matters unrelated to the accused, on their way to the land of one Ravindra, then allegedly, the accused persons namely Suresh Pal, Rajveer, Saurav, Aditya, Prince, and Bijendra, armed with pistols came forward to block their way and prevent them from proceeding further. The respondent-accused Rajveer came forward and threatened them to the effect that they would all, particularly Sonveer, be taught a lesson for opposing them. Suresh Pal, then instigated the accused Aditya to shoot Sonveer, which he did, and the bullet hit him on the chest below the shoulder, making him fall to the ground and meet his end. 4. Consequent to the FIR, accused Rajveer was arrested. The record speaks about his applications for regular bail being rejected b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the High Court in releasing accused Suresh Pal on bail was that the prosecution could not present any circumstance suggestive of him fleeing from justice or creating further trouble by repeating the offences that he has been accused of. The learned Judge also took note of the 'strong alibi' of him being a class-IV employee at BSA Office, Meerut along with inability of the prosecution to explain the presence of lacerated wounds. 8. The appellant-complainant aggrieved by such an order had carried the matter in appeal before us, and by way of our order dated 03rd March 2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1200 of 2025, we had set aside the order granting bail, observing thus :- "6. As is evident from the impugned order, the High Court has not assigned any reason, whatsoever, in allowing the application, granting bail, save and except observing that "there is no material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice". The least that was expected of the High Court was to have appreciated the facts and applied the settled principles of law, more so in a case involving allegations of murder, in granting ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onsideration while considering an appeal against the grant of such bail. Such grounds must be taken in an application for cancellation of bail; and (vi) An appeal against grant of bail must not be allowed to be used as a retaliatory measure. Such an appeal must be confined only to the grounds discussed above." 11. It is clear from the perusal of the above factors that the High Court failed to consider all that was relevant. On parity, it is necessary to refer to Ramesh Bhavan Rathod v. Vishanbhai Hirabhai Makwana(Koli) and Anr. [(2021) 6 SCC 230]. This Court observed that while utilizing parity as a ground for bail, the same must focus on the role of the accused and cannot be utilized solely because another accused person was granted bail in connection with the same offence, and neither can this ground be claimed as a matter of right. [See also: Tarun Kumar v. Assistant Director Directorate of Enforcement [2023 SCC Online SC1486]; Sabita Paul v. State of West Bengal and Anr. [2024 SCC Online SC 374]] 12. The High Court appears, plainly, to have erroneously granted bail to the accused-respondent on the sole ground of parity which it has misunderstood as a tool of dire....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arity cannot be the sole ground for granting bail in a case where the bail applications of other co-accused whose bail applications had been allowed and are released on bail. It is purely a discretion of the court. Before granting or refusing bail, the court must satisfy itself after considering the material placed on record and further developments in the investigations or otherwise and other peculiar circumstances of each case, which show that there are sufficient grounds for releasing the applicant on bail If on examination of any case, it transpires that the case of the applicant before the court is identically similar to the accused on facts and circumstances, who has been bailed out, then the desirability of consistency will require that such an accused should be also released on bail. (emphasis supplied) 13.3 The Himachal Pradesh High Court in Abhay Gupta v. State of H.P. [2016 SCC OnLine HP 1758] held that: " It is more than settled that parity alone cannot be the sole ground for granting of bail. It is only one of the grounds for consideration of the question of bail. There is no absolute hide bound rule that bail must necessarily be granted to the co-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ven when parity as a ground is urged, the sum total of circumstances is to be looked into. 13.7 Recently, the Calcutta High Court in Subires Bhattacharya v. CBI [2024 SCC OnLine Cal 11889] also took the same view in the following terms: "30. Parity cannot be the sole ground for granting bail even at the stage when the bail application of a co-accused is allowed. The Court has to satisfy itself that, on consideration of more materials placed, further developments in the investigations and other different considerations, there are sufficient grounds for releasing the applicant on bail. In deciding the aspect of parity, the role attached to the accused persons, their position in relation to the incident and to the victims is of utmost importance. Court cannot proceed on the basis of parity on a simplistic assessment, which again cannot pass muster under the law." 14. What flows from the above judgments, which have been referred to, only to the limited extent indicated above, is that the High Courts speak in one voice that parity is not the sole ground on which bail can be granted. That, undoubtedly, is the correct position in law. The word 'parity' is defi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....024 in Criminal Misc Bail Application No. 46196 of 2024 directed the release of the respondent-accused Prince in connection with Case Crime No. 159 of 2024. 18. It is noted at the outset that since the background of the case is the same as the one discussed above, no purpose would be served in describing the same once more. The impugned order of the High Court runs into four pages, but however, does not disclose any reason whatsoever which weighed with the Court in granting bail to the respondent-accused Prince. Reference simpliciter is made to Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI and Anr. [(2022) 10 SCC 51] and to Manish Sisodia v. CBI [(2024) 12 SCC 691], however, such a reference to the above-mentioned pronouncements of this Court is not followed by any justification as to what in these cases as held by us, applies to the instant case. 19. In Brijmani Devi v. Pappu Kumar and Anr. [(2022) 4 SCC 497], Nagarathna J., writing for a bench of three learned judges considered a host of previous decisions of this Court held as under: "36. ... As noted from the aforecited judgments, it is not necessary for a court to give elaborate reasons while granting bail particularly when the c....