Absence of criminal antecedents and filing of charge-sheet warrant regular bail in excise law violations.

The applicant was arrested on January 18, 2026, in connection with Crime No. 33/2026 following a police raid by the Tumdibod Outpost, District Rajnandgaon

The prosecution alleged that 147 bulk liters of country-made liquor were seized from the applicant's possession

The applicant was charged under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act.

The applicant moved the High Court for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, arguing that he was falsely implicated, had no criminal antecedents, and that the investigation was complete with the filing of the charge-sheet

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, given the nature of the offense under the C.G. Excise Act and the period of his incarceration

The Court primarily considered Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, which mandates a minimum punishment of one year and a maximum of three years for the illicit possession of liquor

Procedurally, the Court applied Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the grant of regular bail

It further invoked conditions aligned with Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for non-attendance, Section 84 of the BNSS for proclamations, and Section 351 of the BNSS regarding the recording of statements

The Court balanced the gravity of the allegations—specifically the seizure of 147 liters of liquor—against the applicant’s clean criminal record

It noted that the charge-sheet had already been filed, meaning the custodial interrogation of the applicant was no longer required for investigation purposes

Since the applicant had been in jail since January 18, 2026, and the trial was expected to take considerable time to conclude, the Court found that continued detention was not warranted

The Court emphasized that the lack of criminal antecedents and the completion of the investigation favored the grant of liberty, provided stringent conditions were imposed to ensure the applicant's presence during trial

The Court held that the applicant was entitled to bail because the charge-sheet was filed, he had no prior criminal record, and the trial would be prolonged

The grant of bail was made subject to conditions: (i) no seeking of adjournments when witnesses are present; (ii) mandatory presence on trial dates or face proceedings under Section 269 of the BNS; and (iii) mandatory presence during the framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 of the BNSS