Bail granted for alleged document forgery where applicant derived no benefit and trial is pending.

The prosecution alleged that in 2023, during the selection process for Gramin Dak Sevak (GDS), the applicant uploaded a forged 10th-grade mark sheet to an online portal.

The forgery was discovered during verification on October 10, 2023.

The FIR was subsequently lodged on February 9, 2026—a delay of nearly three years.

Counsel for the applicant argued that a third party uploaded the document without the applicant's knowledge, the applicant never joined the post or derived benefits, and there were no criminal antecedents.

The applicant had been in custody since February 12, 2026.

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, given the specific allegations of forgery and the procedural delay in filing the FIR.

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

Substantive charges were considered under Sections 420 (Cheating), 467 (Forgery of valuable security), 468 (Forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (Using as genuine a forged document), and 34 (Common intention) of the Indian Penal Code.

Default and appearance conditions were framed with reference to Section 269 (Non-appearance in response to proclamation), Section 84 (Proclamation for person absconding), and Section 209 of the BNSS.

The court weighed the gravity of the offense—attempting to secure public employment via fabricated documents—against the procedural and factual nuances of the case.

The court noted that while the verification occurred in late 2023, the FIR was delayed until early 2026.

Crucially, the court observed that the applicant had not derived any actual benefit from the selection, as he never joined the post.

The court also took into account the lack of criminal antecedents, the fact that the charge sheet had not yet been filed, and the applicant's duration of judicial custody since February 12, 2026.

Given that the trial was not expected to conclude soon, the court found that continued incarceration was not warranted.

The holding is contingent upon strict conditions, including: the applicant must not seek unnecessary adjournments [para. 7(i)], must appear on all fixed dates per Section 269 of BNSS [para. 7(ii)], and must be present for the framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 of BNSS [para. 7(iv)]. Non-compliance allows the trial court to treat the default as an abuse of liberty [para. 7(v)].