dismissed by this Court on 03.12.2024 on the ground that “they could have been apprehended by the police after around three years of the incident after an incessant effort”. But some more time have lapsed in this case. All the similarly situated persons have been granted bail either by the trial Court or by this Court. The co-accused in the present case were granted bail by this Court, but the order was challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The said petition came to be disposed of by giving a liberty to the complainant to move a bail cancellation application before the High court, and upon doing so, the bail earlier granted to the accused, Sanjay Kumar Jangid and Dontesh Jangid, was cancelled by this Court on 03.12.2024, which was subsequently stayed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 03.02.2025, passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 1632/2025 and then the case of the petitioners therein was considered to be fit for grant of bail. The petitioner has a strong arguable case and his case is not distinguishable in any manner from those who have been enlarged on bail. Similarly placed persons must be treated equally, has been the principle of parity. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, particularly, the fact that offences alleged are exclusively triable by a Court of Magistrate, charge-sheet has already been filed and similarly situated persons have been granted bail, thus, on the ground of parity, the petitioner too deserves to be enlarged on bail. In light of these facts and
