Jharkhand High Court: Mere Grant Of Bail To Co-Accused Not Sufficient For Grant Of Bail On Parity, Totality Of Circumstances To Be Seen

The Jharkhand High Court has reiterated that mere grant of bail to another accused is not sufficient to determine whether a case for grant of bail on the basis of parity is made or not.

The Court was considering an Appeal filed under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 against an order whereby prayer for regular bail of the Appellant was rejected for the offence registered under Section 370(4)/34 of the I.P.C.

The Division Bench of Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Navneet Kumar observed, "It is further settled connotation of law that Court cannot exercise its powers in a capricious manner and has to consider the totality of circumstances before granting bail and by only simply saying that another accused has been granted bail is not sufficient to determine whether a case for grant of bail on the basis of parity has been established. Reference in this regard may be made to the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Ramesh Bhavan Rathod vs. Vishanbhai Hirabhai Makwana, (2021)."

The Appellant was represented by Advocate Nandan Prasad while the Respondent was represented by Public Prosecutor Pankaj Kumar.

Facts of the Case

It was the contention of the Counsel for the Appellant that Appellant was languishing in judicial custody since May 20th, 2023 and the trial has not concluded. He submitted that two other co-accused were granted bail and thus Court should grant him bail too.

On the other hand, the Public Prosecutor submitted that the cases of the two co-accused, who have been directed to be released on bail by a coordinate bench of the Court is different from the case of the Appellant, since, against them the allegation was only that they were taking the services of the victims while the allegation against the present Appellant is that he is the person instrumental in carrying/ trafficking the two children and as such, principle of parity cannot be said to be applicable herein.

Reasoning

The Court, at the outset, observed that it is not disputed that the principle of parity is made applicable in the matter of bail also, but while applying the said principle, the factual aspect and nature of allegation from whom the parity is sought for needs to be examined.

It was of the view that the principle of parity cannot to be applicable in the present case in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in Tarun Kumar vs. Assistant Director Directorate of Enforcement, (2023).

"As would appear from the orders of the Court allowing the prayer for bail of the co-accused by quashing the order of the concerned court that the co-accused who were directed to be released on bail were not at all involved in the matter of trafficking attracting the ingredients of the offence under Section 370 of the IPC while against the appellant there is allegation of direct overt act being instrumental in trafficking the two minor victims, one of whom is still traceless," the Court observed.

The Appeal was accordingly dismissed.

Cause Title: Manoj Jaiswal vs. The State of Jharkhand

Click here to read/ download Order