Bail granted despite criminal antecedents as charge-sheet was filed and trial conclusion was likely to be delayed.

The applicant, Suresh Sonjhara, sought regular bail after being arrested on August 21, 2025, in connection with Crime No. 148/2025.

The prosecution alleged that on July 1, 2025, the complainant, Amar Dixit, discovered his house had been broken into while he was away for a family ceremony. Gold and silver ornaments worth approximately ₹36,000/- were reported stolen.

The applicant was charged under Sections 331(4) and 305 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated due to his profession in gold cleaning and that witnesses had not supported the prosecution's version.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, considering his period of incarceration and the nature of the evidence.

The court primarily applied Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the High Court's power to grant bail.

It also considered the substantive offences under Sections 331(4) (Lurking house-trespass or house-breaking) and 305 (Theft in a dwelling house, etc.) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

Furthermore, the court evaluated the relevance of criminal antecedents and the procedural necessity of ensuring the accused's presence during trial under Sections 84, 209, 269, and 351 of the BNSS.

The Court weighed the State's opposition—which centered on the recovery of stolen articles from the applicant—against the applicant's defense.

The Court noted that although the applicant had eight criminal antecedents, he had been acquitted in five of them, and an explanation was provided for the remaining three.

Critically, the Court observed that the charge-sheet had already been filed, the applicant had been in custody since August 21, 2025 (nearly nine months), and the trial was unlikely to conclude soon.

By evaluating the length of detention against the progress of the trial, the Court determined that continued incarceration was not warranted.

The applicant was ordered to be released on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, subject to specific conditions: providing undertakings to not seek unnecessary adjournments, ensuring personal presence on all trial dates (especially during framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 BNSS), and complying with protocols under Sections 84, 209, and 269 of the BNSS to prevent abuse of liberty.