Absence of criminal antecedents and lack of direct possession justify bail under Excise Act.

The applicant, a 22-year-old B-Pharma student, filed a first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023

The prosecution alleged that on August 1, 2025, during a raid at Ratlam Railway Station, an assailant fled leaving behind bags containing 54 bulk litres of illicit country-made foreign liquor

The applicant was implicated based on the registration number of a vehicle found at the scene and was apprehended on March 17, 2026

He was charged under Section 34(2) of the M.P. Excise Act, 1915

The applicant argued he was falsely implicated on suspicion and that the contraband was not recovered from his direct possession

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, considering the nature of the recovery and his personal circumstances

The court primarily considered Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, regarding the High Court's power to grant bail

It also applied Section 34(2) of the M.P. Excise Act, 1915, which penalizes the possession of illicit liquor in quantities exceeding 50 bulk litres

Furthermore, the court relied on judicial principles governing bail, specifically the necessity of custodial interrogation, the absence of criminal antecedents, the likelihood of recidivism, and the socio-economic status of the accused

The court noted that the illicit liquor was not seized from the active or direct possession of the applicant

It observed that the investigation concerning the applicant was largely complete, rendering further custodial interrogation unnecessary

The court highlighted the applicant's status as a young student with no prior criminal record, which minimized the likelihood of recidivism or tampering with evidence

It further reasoned that since the trial would take time to conclude and the applicant had family responsibilities, continued incarceration served no compelling purpose

The court clarified that the applicant’s complicity would ultimately be determined during the trial

The holding was conditioned upon the applicant furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety of the same amount

The court imposed several conditions, including regular appearance before the trial court, refraining from committing similar offenses, and ensuring no inducement or threat is made to witnesses

The order remains effective until the conclusion of the trial, subject to compliance with the stated conditions