'Parity Cannot Be Sole Ground for Bail': SC Sets Aside Bail to Murder Accused

The Supreme Court on November 28, 2025 said that parity cannot be treated as the sole basis for granting bail, stressing that the individual role played by each accused is central to the decision.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N. Kotiswar Singh reiterated that while bail is often described as the rule and jail the exception, this principle does not mean that bail can be granted without examining the circumstances of the alleged offence. Court underscored that numerous judgments have outlined the factors to be considered while assessing bail.

Court was deciding an appeal filed by Sagar, the complainant, challenging a January 3, 2025 order of the Allahabad High Court that had granted bail to Rajveer in a case registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

According to the FIR, a verbal altercation preceded the killing of the appellant’s father, Sonveer. On the day of the incident, Rajveer and others allegedly threatened that Sonveer would be taught a lesson for opposing them. The FIR states that Suresh Pal then instigated co-accused Aditya to shoot Sonveer, and Aditya fired the fatal shot.

Rajveer’s bail applications were earlier rejected twice by the Meerut court. The High Court, however, granted bail on the grounds that Rajveer had no criminal antecedents and that his father had been granted bail, treating parity as sufficient justification.

Examining whether parity alone can justify bail, the Supreme Court referred to its recent decision in Ashok Dhankad v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr (2025) and observed that the High Court had overlooked the relevant considerations. Citing Ramesh Bhavan Rathod v. Vishanbhai Hirabhai Makwana (Koli) & Anr (2021), the bench reiterated that parity must be assessed with reference to the role of the accused, and cannot be invoked merely because a co-accused has been granted bail. Nor can it be claimed as a matter of right.

The bench held that the High Court had “plainly” erred in granting bail on parity alone, treating it as a direct tool of application rather than a principle tied to the specific position and role of the accused in the offence. This, court said, required the impugned order to be set aside on that ground alone.

Court emphasised that multiple High Court decisions consistently affirm that parity cannot be the sole ground for bail. “Position,” the bench said, is the decisive factor, meaning the role the accused is alleged to have played. It noted that different participants in the same incident may perform different acts, and parity must be assessed only with those who played comparable roles.

In this case, court recorded that Rajveer was alleged to have instigated Aditya to shoot the victim. Given this role, it held that the High Court’s reliance on parity was misplaced.

Court directed Rajveer to surrender before the trial court within two weeks.

In a connected appeal, the Supreme Court also set aside the bail granted to another accused, Prince, noting that the High Court had given no reasons for its order. His case was remanded to the High Court for fresh consideration in light of the gravity of the offence, the role attributed to him, and other relevant factors recognised in precedent.

Case Title: Sagar Vs State of UP & Anr

Judgment Date: November 28, 2025

Bench: Justices Sanjay Karol and N Kotiswar Singh