Bail granted considering prolonged custody, charge-sheet filing, presumption of innocence, and parity with co-accused.

In brief

The question

Whether the petitioners should be enlarged on bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, despite the serious allegations of organized crime, preparation to commit dacoity, and possession of lethal weapons.

The court held

The High Court allowed both bail applications and directed that Purusottam Mali, Ajay Mali, Hensen Dhoba and Phabit Bagh be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of ₹25,000 each with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the court in seisin of the case, subject to such further terms as that court might impose.

It also directed

As an express condition, each petitioner was required to report to the jurisdictional police station once a fortnight, preferably on a Sunday, between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon, for three months from the date of actual release. The Investigating Officer/Officer-in-Charge was directed not to detain the petitioners unnecessarily after recording their attendance. Both applications were accordingly disposed of.

01Facts

The two petitioners in each bail application were accused in Maidalpur P.S. Case No. 23 of 2026, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 248 of 2026, pending before the SDJM, Nabarangpur. They were charged under Sections 310(4), 310(5) and 111(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read with Section 27 of the Arms Act, on allegations that they had assembled at an isolated place with co-accused persons, armed with lethal weapons, and were preparing to commit dacoity.

p. 2

The petitioners had remained in custody since 28 February 2026, and the charge-sheet had been filed during their detention. They sought bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The Court considered, among other circumstances, the grant of bail to co-accused Urdhaba Harijan in BLAPL No. 3120 of 2026.

pp. 2–3

02Issues

i.Whether the petitioners should be enlarged on bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, despite the serious allegations of organized crime, preparation to commit dacoity, and possession of lethal weapons.

pp. 2–3

ii.Whether the petitioners’ prolonged pre-trial detention, filing of the charge-sheet, presumption of innocence, and parity with a co-accused granted bail justified the grant of bail.

p. 3

03Law Applied

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, concerning the High Court’s power to grant bail. It also considered the offences alleged under Sections 310(4), 310(5) and 111(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.

p. 2

The Court relied on the general criminal-law principle that an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and considered the constitutional and procedural significance of pre-trial detention, completion of investigation, and parity with a co-accused who had already been granted bail.

p. 3

Provisions in the judgment · 4 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 310 Section 111

Arms Act, 1959 Section 27

04Reasoning

The Court weighed the gravity and nature of the alleged offences against the circumstances favouring release. Although the allegations involved an alleged organised criminal plan, assembly with armed co-accused, and preparation to commit dacoity, the petitioners had been in custody since 28 February 2026 and the charge-sheet had already been submitted.

pp. 2–3

The Court also considered the presumption of innocence, the manner in which the petitioners were implicated, and the fact that co-accused Urdhaba Harijan had been granted bail in a connected application. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the prosecution case, the Court found the circumstances sufficient to admit both sets of petitioners to bail.

p. 3