Parity In Bail Matters Binding Unless Challenged By State: Orissa High Court

The Orissa High Court has reinforced the principle of parity in bail matters, ruling that when co-accused standing on similar footing are granted bail and such orders remain unchallenged by the State, the benefit must extend to other similarly situated petitioners. Justice G. Satapathy presided over the two bail applications filed by the petitioners who were allegedly involved in a rioting incident involving lethal weapons. The Orissa High Court evaluated the applications under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, noting that the petitioners had been in custody since April 2026.

Key Takeaways

Judicial Consistency and Parity

Granting bail based on parity ensures that similarly situated accused persons are treated equally under the law, preventing arbitrary distinctions in judicial discretion.

Impact of Unchallenged Orders

If the State or informant fails to challenge a bail order granted to a co-accused, that order serves as a persuasive precedent for other accused persons in the same case.

Finality of Investigation

The submission of a charge sheet significantly tilts the balance in favor of the accused for bail, as the primary need for custodial interrogation ceases to exist.

Parity in Bail Matters and Evidence

The petitioners brought to the Court's attention that a Co-ordinate Bench had already granted bail to other accused persons in Shantilata Behera & others. The Court observed that the State and the informant had not challenged the previous order, thereby accepting the conditions and the release of other participants in the same alleged rioting incident. The Court noted that the petitioners had already spent substantial time in custody and the charge sheet had been submitted, reducing the risk of tampering with evidence.

The Court, in its reasoning, observed: “In the aforesaid premises and on consideration of materials placed on record together with grant of bail to co-accused Shantilata Behera & others in Shantilata Behera & others, this Court without expressing any view on merit admits each of the petitioners to bail on the same terms and conditions as imposed on the co-accused...”

Ratio

When co-accused standing on an identical footing have been granted bail by a court of competent jurisdiction, and such order has attained finality due to lack of challenge by the State or the informant, the principle of parity dictates that other similarly situated accused persons are entitled to the same relief, subject to the completion of the investigation and specific conduct-based stipulations.

Background

The case originated from Kabisuryanagar PS Case No. 232 of 2026, where the petitioners and 18 others were accused of committing rioting while armed with deadly weapons. The prosecution alleged an attempt on the lives of three individuals under Sections 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 190, and 333 of the BNS. The petitioners moved the High Court seeking bail, primarily arguing parity with co-accused who were granted bail in Shantilata Behera & others. The Orissa High Court found that the petitioners were on a similar footing and, considering their period of detention and the filing of the charge sheet, allowed the applications.

Case Details:
Case No.: BLAPL NOs.5649 & 5654 of 2026
Case Title: Sahil Raulo @ Sahil Raula @ Gunjan and another v. State of Orissa
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. R.N.Rout, Advocate
For the Respondent(s): Mr. R.B.Mishra, Addl. PP; Mr. B.Karna, Advocate for the Informant

Source: 2026 CaseBase(ORI) 1587