The court should not give preferential treatment to accused in grant of bail considering his celebrity status, mass following, political clout, and financial muscle.

 Whether celebrity status, social influence, and capacity to interfere with witnesses or tamper with evidence should be treated as mitigating or aggravating factors while considering bail applications in serious criminal cases — Held, Constitution enshrines equality before law under Art.14 and mandates that no individual, however wealthy, influential, or famous, can claim exemption from the rigours of law, as celebrity status does not elevate an accused above the law nor entitle preferential treatment in matters like grant of bail.

Per R. Mahadevan, J.

The Constitution of India enshrines equality before law under Art.14, and mandates that no individual – however wealthy, influential, or famous – can claim exemption from the rigours of law. A celebrity status does not elevate an accused above the law, nor entitle him to preferential treatment in matters like grant of bail. Popularity cannot be a shield for impunity. As this Court held, influence, resources and social status cannot form a basis for granting bail where there is a genuine risk of prejudice to the investigation or trial. In the present case, by treating A2’s stature as a mitigating factor, the High Court committed a manifest perversity in the exercise of its discretion, thereby warranting cancellation of bail. As demonstrated earlier, A2 is not a common undertrial. He enjoys celebrity status, mass following, political clout, and financial muscle.