Absence of criminal antecedents and filing of charge-sheet justify bail in cases of illegal liquor possession.

The applicant, Golu Manjhi, was arrested on December 28, 2025, following a police raid based on informant testimony regarding illegal liquor sales near Latnala, Gudeli village

Authorities allegedly recovered 50 bulk liters of country-made mahua liquor and 30 packets of mahua lahan (totaling 600 kg) from the applicant

Consequently, Crime No. 87/2025 was registered under Sections 34(1)(a)(f), 34(2), and 59(a) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act

The applicant filed this first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, asserting false implication and noting that the maximum sentence for the alleged offense is three years

Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail considering the nature of the recovery, absence of criminal antecedents, and the duration of his pretrial detention

The court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which governs the High Court’s power to grant bail

Substantively, the case involves Sections 34(1)(a)(f), 34(2), and 59(a) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, where Section 34(2) prescribes a minimum imprisonment of one year and a maximum of three years

The court also referenced procedural standards under Sections 84, 209, 269, and 351 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) to regulate the conduct of the accused while on bail

The Court evaluated the application by balancing the gravity of the allegations—recovery of a significant quantity of illicit liquor—against the procedural status and the applicant's profile.

The Court noted that the applicant had been in custody since December 28, 2025

Key factors favoring the applicant included the fact that a charge-sheet had already been filed and that the applicant had no prior criminal record

Furthermore, the Court observed that the conclusion of the trial would likely be delayed

By applying these facts to the relatively moderate sentencing bracket of the Excise Act (maximum three years), the Court determined that continued incarceration was unnecessary during the trial phase

The holding is contingent upon several conditions: the applicant must not seek unnecessary adjournments, must appear at all trial stages (including framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 BNSS), and must comply with BNS/BNSS provisions regarding presence to avoid proceedings for bail jumping under Section 209 BNS

The Office was directed to communicate the order to the trial court for immediate compliance