Karnataka High Court Invokes Parity Rule To Grant Bail In Education Act Case

Reinforcing the judicial principle of parity in criminal jurisprudence, the Karnataka High Court has granted regular bail to an accused after co-accused facing identical allegations were previously enlarged by a coordinate bench. The decision underscores that where allegations and roles are indistinguishable, the benefit of liberty must be extended uniformly to ensure equitable treatment under the law.

Justice G Basavaraja, presiding as a single judge bench, adjudicated upon the petition seeking regular bail for the eighth accused in a case involving multiple offences under the newly enacted BNS and the Karnataka Education Act, 1983. The court focused on the consistency of judicial orders when dealing with similarly situated accused persons in the same crime.

Court Observations on Parity Principle

The petitioner’s counsel argued that a Co-ordinate Bench of the High Court had already granted bail to accused Nos. 1, 2, 5, and 6 in Criminal Petition No. 15881 of 2026 connected with Criminal Petition No. 15962 of 2026. It was contended that since the allegations against the current petitioner (Accused No. 8) were identical to those against the previously released accused, he was entitled to the same relief.

Directions Issued to the Petitioner

The Court has the following directions:

"The allegations made against the present petitioner and accused Nos.1, 2, 5 and 6 are one and the same. Hence, in view of principle of parity, I proceed to pass the following: 

(i) The criminal petition is allowed."

(ii) The petitioner/accused No.8 is directed to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.196 of 2026 of Mangaluru South Police Station, Mangaluru City for the offences punishable under Sections 140(3), 127(2), 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 352, 109 read with Section 190 of BNS and Section 116(2) of Karnataka Education Act, 1983 pending on the file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM Court, Mangaluru, subject to the following conditions:

a) The petitioner/Accused No.8 shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety for the likesum, to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

b) The petitioner/Accused No.8 shall appear regularly on all the dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless the Trial Court exempts his appearance for valid reasons;

c) The petitioner/Accused No.8 shall not directly or indirectly threaten or tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

d) The petitioner/Accused No.8 shall not involve in similar offences in future;

e) The petitioner/Accused No.8 shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Trial Court without permission of the said Court until the case registered against him is disposed off."

Background

The matter arose from Crime No. 196/2026 registered by the Mangaluru South Police Station. The petitioner was implicated for offences under Sections 140(3) (Kidnapping), 127(2) (Wrongful confinement), 115(2) (Voluntarily causing hurt), 118(1) (Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons), 351(2) (Criminal intimidation), 352 (Intentional insult), and 109 (Abetment) read with Section 190 (Unlawful assembly) of the BNS, alongside Section 116(2) of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983.

The petitioner moved the High Court under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 (corresponding to Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.). The Court noted the previous orders in Criminal Petition No. 15881 of 2026 connected with Criminal Petition No. 15962 of 2026 where the reasons for bail had already been assigned for other accused members. Finding no distinction in the nature of allegations, the Court allowed the petition and directed the registry to issue the certified copy by hand to the petitioner's counsel.

Case Details:
Case No.: Criminal Petition No. 16061 OF 2026
Neutral Citation: 2026:KHC:59269
Case Title: Rahan M.P. V. State Of Karnataka
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): Sri. Nishit Kumar Shetty., Advocate
For the Respondent(s): Sri. G.S. Nagharish, HCGP

Source: 2026 CaseBase(KAR) 28586