JUDGMENT 1. This is second attempt by the petitioner seeking bail in S.T. Case No.137 of 2015 arising out of Kamdara P.S Case No.46 of 2013. 2. A First Information Report for the offence punishable under sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 307, 353 I.P.C, section 25(1-b)a/26(2)/27/35 Arms Act and section 17 C.L.A Act was lodged on 30.11.2013. 3. In the First Information Report, the petitioner is accused no.4 and he is said to be an active member of the extremist organisation-PLFI. He is in judicial custody since 20.12.2014 in this case. There are nine criminal cases of serious nature registered against the petitioner. 4. Referring to order dated 06.08.2018 by which co-accused-Amrit Horo @ Mocho has been granted bail in B.A. No.8614 of 2017, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the co-accused-Amrit Horo @ Mocho has also criminal antecedent and after calling for his criminal antecedent report, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court has granted bail in B.A. No.8614 of 2017. 5. By now it is well-established that length of custody is not a ground to enlarge a person, who is accused of serious crimes, on bail. While considering a bail application there are several factors which have to be kept in mind. In " Prasanta Kumar Sarkar Vs. Ashis Chatterjee and another" reported in (2010) 14 SCC 496 , the Hon''ble Supreme Court has observed thus; " It is well settled that, among other circumstances, the factors to be borne in mind while considering an application for bail are: (i) whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground to believe that the accused had committed the offence; (ii) nature and gravity of the accusation; (iii) severity of the punishment in the event of conviction; (iv) danger of the accused absconding or fleeing, if released on bail; (v) character, behaviour, means, position and standing of the accused; (vi) likelihood of the offence being repeated; (vii) reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being influenced; and (viii) danger, of course, of justice being thwarted by grant of bail." 6. On the plea of parity raised by the petitioner, all that is required to indicate is that it is not such a fundamental principle in criminal jurisprudence that on the basis of parity alone a co-accused can seek bail. On the plea of parity raised by the petitioner, all that is required to indicate is that it is not such a fundamental principle in criminal jurisprudence that on the basis of parity alone a co-accused can seek bail. His liberty is not the only concern of the Court, his own criminal antecedents and the well-known principles governing grant of bail need to be kept in mind [refer, " Neeru Yadav Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another" reported in (2014) 16 SCC 508 ]. 7. The allegations levelled in the First Information Report reveal that the extremist party (written as ''Dasta''), armed with weapons and wearing military dress when were intercepted by the police they started firing. From the place of incident several incriminating materials including, live and empty cartridges were recovered. 8. By an order dated 28.08.2017 passed in B.A. No.4033 of 2017 previous bail application filed by the petitioner has been dismissed; it reflects on merits of the case also. 9. In view of the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to entertain this bail application and, accordingly, this bail application is dismissed.