Bail Granted for Possession of Illicit Liquor Where Investigation is Complete and Custody is No Longer Necessary

The applicants, Hemant (a driver) and Ajay (a cook), were arrested on 11.02.2026 after being intercepted on a motorcycle by the police from P.S. Narvar, Ujjain.

A search revealed 61.56 bulk liters of illicit illicit country-made foreign liquor in gunny bags tied to the vehicle.

The applicants were charged under Section 34(2) of the M.P. Excise Act, 1915, and have been in judicial custody since their arrest.

This is their first bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, filed after the completion of the investigation and submission of the final report.

1. Whether the applicants are entitled to the grant of bail considering the nature of the recovery, their socio-economic background, and the absence of significant criminal antecedents.

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

It further considered Section 34(2) of the M.P. Excise Act, 1915, regarding the unlawful transport of liquor.

The Court relied on established principles of criminal jurisprudence, noting that bail is discretionary based on the gravity of the offence, the likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice, and the potential for tampering with evidence or witnesses.

The Court evaluated the "prima facie merit" of the applicants' contentions against the State’s opposition regarding the gravity of the offence.

It noted that the investigation is complete and the final report has been submitted, meaning further custodial interrogation is unnecessary.

The Court observed that Hemant has a clean past, and while Ajay has one pending trial, he has no prior convictions.

Given their professions and family responsibilities, the Court found no substantial risk of the applicants absconding or influencing witnesses.

It concluded that since the offence is triable by a Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) and is not "heinous or brutal," continued incarceration was not justified.

The holding is contingent upon conditions including regular appearance before the trial court, refraining from committing similar offences, and not tampering with evidence.

The Court clarified that these observations are limited to the bail application and do not reflect on the final merits of the trial.