The Supreme Court has observed that an accused cannot be denied the benefit of parity with discharged co-accused if the evidence against him is not qualitatively different or stronger.
A Bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan held that when courts have already found the material against certain accused persons insufficient to proceed with the case, similar treatment should ordinarily extend to other accused facing substantially identical allegations and evidence.
The Court made the observation while hearing a plea seeking discharge from criminal proceedings on the ground that co-accused in the same matter had already been discharged. The petitioner argued that the prosecution relied on the same set of materials against him and that no additional incriminating evidence existed to justify continuation of proceedings.
Agreeing with the submission, the Bench said the principle of parity is an important safeguard against arbitrary or inconsistent treatment in criminal law. It observed that unless the prosecution is able to demonstrate a distinct and stronger case against the remaining accused, continuing proceedings against him alone would be unjustified.
The Court clarified that parity cannot be claimed as an absolute rule in every criminal case and that the role attributed to each accused must still be independently assessed. However, where the allegations, witness statements and documentary evidence are substantially the same, courts must maintain consistency in their approach.
Emphasising the need for fairness in criminal prosecutions, the Supreme Court held that an accused should not be subjected to trial merely because proceedings against others concluded earlier in their favour on identical material. The Bench accordingly granted relief to the petitioner.
The post Supreme Court upholds parity principle in discharge of accused appeared first on India Legal.