Individualised assessment of each accused

The appellants were not treated as an undifferentiated group. The Court considered each attributed role and the supporting material. The nature of allegations differed between appellants. The stage of proceedings was also relevant. A common FIR does not erase individual distinctions. Different outcomes may be justified by different roles and evidence. Ignoring relevant differences could itself be arbitrary. The judgment therefore adopted an accused-specific assessment. (Gulfisha Fatima v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & connected matters | 2026 INSC 2)