Bail granted for M.P. Excise Act offense considering youth and lack of prior conviction.

The applicant, Vicky, filed a first application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, seeking bail in connection with Crime No. 59/2026, registered at Police Station - Boda, District Rajgarh (M.P.), for an offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the M.P. Excise Act, 1915.

The applicant has been in judicial custody since 22.02.2026.

A police raid on 21.02.2026 at Vicky's shop in Village Hulkhedi led to the recovery of 60 bulk litres of illicit country-made and foreign liquor near the shop.

The illicit liquor was seized in due compliance with procedure, and an FIR was registered against Vicky, who was apprehended on the spot.

The applicant claims false implication and states the shop where the liquor was recovered does not belong to him, and the liquor was not seized from his active, conscious, direct, and immediate possession.

The investigation is almost complete, and further custodial interrogation is not needed.

The State noted one criminal antecedent against the applicant, Crime No. 164/2022, which is pending for trial, but the applicant has never been convicted for any offence.

1. Whether the applicant, Vicky, should be granted bail in connection with Crime No. 59/2026 registered under Section 34(2) of the M.P. Excise Act, 1915.

The court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, concerning the grant of bail.

The court also considered the provisions of Section 34(2) of the M.P. Excise Act, 1915, under which the applicant was charged.

The decision was guided by principles regarding the likelihood of the applicant fleeing from justice, recidivism, tampering with evidence, or influencing witnesses, as well as the applicant's socio-economic status and the gravity of the alleged offence.

The court considered the applicant's argument of false implication, the claim that the shop and seized liquor were not in his direct possession, and that police custody was no longer required as the investigation was almost complete.

The State opposed bail due to the gravity of the offence and cited one pending criminal antecedent, although the applicant has no prior convictions.

The court noted that the trial would take time to conclude and that the applicant has dependent family responsibilities, making the possibility of him fleeing from justice unlikely.

Given the absence of a substantial criminal past and previous convictions, and considering the applicant's socio-economic status, the court found no likelihood of recidivism, tampering with evidence, or influencing witnesses.

The offence is triable by a Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC).

The court concluded that there were no compelling reasons to continue the incarceration of the young applicant.

The applicant, Vicky, shall be released on bail for Crime No. 59/2026 upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the same amount, subject to specific conditions.

These conditions include remaining present at hearings, not committing similar offences, not inducing or threatening witnesses, and not tampering with evidence, with provisions for the conditions to be reproduced and explained to the applicant and surety.

The order is effective until the end of the trial, but the trial court may cancel bail upon breach of conditions.