Absence of recovery and sole reliance on co-accused memorandum justify bail despite criminal history.

On April 21, 2022, three individuals allegedly looted a jewelry shop in Gondpara, Bilaspur, at gunpoint, stealing ornaments and cash

The applicant was not named in the initial FIR but was arrested on April 4, 2023, following a memorandum statement provided by a co-accused

A supplementary charge sheet was subsequently filed against him

The applicant has remained in custody since his arrest, and while the trial has commenced, only 16 out of 30 witnesses have been examined to date

The State opposed bail, citing the applicant's criminal antecedents, which include charges for murder (Section 302 IPC) and robbery (Section 392 IPC)

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) despite his criminal history and the nature of the charges

The court's decision was governed by Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) regarding the grant of regular bail

The substantive charges against the applicant involve Section 397 (robbery or dacoity with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt) and Section 34 of the IPC, alongside Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act

The court also referenced procedural safeguards and penalties for bail misuse under Sections 84, 209, 269, and 351 of the BNSS and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)

The court found that although the applicant is a "habitual offender" with two other serious criminal cases pending against him, the specific evidence in the current case is weak

The court noted that the applicant was implicated solely on the basis of a memorandum statement from a co-accused, and no incriminating articles or stolen property were recovered from his possession

Furthermore, the court emphasized that the applicant has been in jail for nearly three years (since April 2023) and, with fourteen witnesses still remaining, the trial is unlikely to conclude in the near future

Balancing the lack of direct evidence against the duration of incarceration, the court determined that continued detention was not warranted

The applicant was ordered to be released on a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two local sureties of like amount

The release is subject to several conditions, including a prohibition on seeking unnecessary adjournments, a ban on threatening witnesses, and a mandate to appear personally at key stages of the trial (opening of the case, framing of charges, and recording of statements)

Any violation of these terms allows the trial court to initiate proceedings under Section 209 or 269 of the BNS