Parity with co-accused -- Co-accused granted bail – Same benefit cannot be declined to the petitioner unless and until certain differentiating facts are brought to the notice between the petitioner and the said co-accused -- As no differentiating fact has been brought to the notice, therefore the petitioner has made out a case for the grant of regular bail – Petitioner ordered to be released on regular bail.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 26.10.2020

Recording of offence – Regular bail -- Petitioner alleged to have recorded the act when the co-accused was committing the heinous act – Actual act is alleged against co-accused – Petitioner is in custody since 14.6.2019 – Petitioner ordered to be released on bail.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 31.08.2020

Regular bail -- Allegations that two persons in a drunken condition had slapped the complainant, taken away his phone and then called up his mother and thereafter the 3rd person (unnamed) took him besides the canal and did a wrong act with him -- A sum of Rs.5000/- and two mobile phones were also snatched – Initial allegation was against an unnamed person -- Complainant suffered a supplementary statement in which the name of the present petitioner has figured – DNA report of the complainant also does not support the prosecution version -- Petitioner was arrested on 18.11.2019 -- Trial is at the initial stage and would take time to conclude particularly keeping in view the current Covid-19 situation -- Petitioner held entitled to the benefit of bail.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 13.08.2020

POCSO matter -- Penetrative sexual assault – Regular bail -- Two prosecution witnesses including the complainant have been examined but 09 PWs are yet to be examined – When, the petitioner is in custody for almost 07 months; he is not involved in any other case; the COVID-19 pandemic and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time – Petitioner is granted concession of regular bail.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 19.06.2020

POCSO case – Juvenile matter -- Regular bail -- Record or the circumstances of the case do not show that there is any reasonable ground for believing that the petitioner is likely to bring himself into association with known criminals if released on bail; or that he will expose himself to some moral, physical or psychological danger – Policy and provision of the Juvenile Justice Act is in favour of grant of bail to the juvenile -- Since the circumstances or the grounds justifying denial of the bail are not discernible in the case, therefore, the petitioner deserve to be allowed concession of bail.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 02.06.2020