Bail granted after successful mediation and settlement, with no flight or witness-tampering risk.

The petitioner, an employee of Nalanda Public School, was accused of embezzling money by manipulating documents and thereby defrauding the informant.

The case arose from Markatnagar P.S. Case No. 166 of 2025, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 817 of 2025, pending before the learned JMFC-I, Cuttack, for offences under Sections 318(4), 316(4), 336(2), 338, 339, 340(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The petitioner surrendered before the Court and sought bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

During the proceedings, the parties were referred to mediation, which was successful, and counsel for the petitioner and the informant jointly submitted that the dispute had been settled.

The charge sheet had also been submitted while the petitioner was in custody.

Whether the petitioner should be released on bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with the pending criminal case.

Whether the successful mediation and settlement between the parties, along with the petitioner’s pre-trial detention, submission of the charge sheet, and absence of material indicating abscondence or intimidation of witnesses, justified the grant of bail.

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, governing the High Court’s power to grant bail.

It considered the general bail principles that pre-trial detention should not become punitive, that the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and that bail may be granted where the record does not indicate a likelihood of abscondence or interference with witnesses.

The Court also considered the procedural circumstance that the charge sheet had been filed and the parties had reached a mediated settlement.

The alleged offences were those punishable under Sections 318(4), 316(4), 336(2), 338, 339, 340(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The Court noted that the parties had successfully resolved their dispute through mediation and that the informant’s counsel confirmed the settlement.

It further took into account the petitioner’s pre-trial incarceration, the filing of the charge sheet, and the absence of any material suggesting that she would abscond or threaten witnesses if released.

Applying the presumption of innocence and the relevant bail considerations under Section 483 of the BNSS, the Court held that continued detention was not warranted.

The Court expressly refrained from expressing any opinion on the merits of the prosecution case.

The petitioner was directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of ₹1,00,000 with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, subject to such further terms and conditions as that Court deemed fit and proper.

The BLAPL was accordingly disposed of, and directions were issued for communication of the order to the concerned Court and Jail authorities.