The Karnataka High Court has stated that an accused’s plea for bail based on the principle of parity is not obligatory for the court, emphasizing that each offense should be considered individually.
In a recent development, a single-judge bench led by Justice M Nagaprasanna rejected the second bail application of Almas Pasha, charged under section 302 IPC. The judge emphasized crucial factors in bail considerations, including the gravity of the accusation, potential danger of the accused fleeing, and the nature of the offense. The ruling highlighted the oversight of the accused’s criminal history by the High Court, emphasizing the need for judicious discretion in such cases. The court set aside the High Court’s order, stating that the accused should be taken into custody immediately if at large. The decision clarified that it did not express opinions on other cases and emphasized its purpose to annul the bail order. The petitioner’s argument for bail based on parity with other accused was deemed unacceptable, with the court rejecting the plea due to the chilling effect of the petitioner’s individual actions. The court also dismissed claims related to the petitioner’s father’s medical condition as a pretext for bail. Despite the rejection, the petitioner retains the option to seek bail based on changed circumstances in the future.
Written by Samruddhi Kulkarni from ILS Law College pune, intern under legal vidhiya.
Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is of a personal nature.