Bail granted for Section 34(2) Excise Act offence upon completion of investigation and lack of prior convictions.

The applicant, Rajendra Dangi, was arrested on January 2, 2026, in connection with Crime No. 02/2026 registered at Police Station Narsinghgarh

According to the prosecution, a police team intercepted a motorcycle carrying three individuals—the applicant and two others—who were found in possession of 76 bulk liters of country-made raw liquor

The applicant was charged under Section 34(2) of the M.P. Excise Act, 1915

The applicant sought bail on the grounds that the investigation was complete, the final report had been submitted, and he had been in custody for over two months

The State opposed the bail, citing one criminal antecedent against the applicant

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, considering the nature of the offense and his personal circumstances

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

penal provisions of Section 34(2) of the M.P. Excise Act, 1915, regarding the illegal possession and transport of liquor

established judicial principles regarding bail, including the assessment of the risk of fleeing from justice, the likelihood of recidivism, the potential for tampering with evidence, and the socio-economic status of the accused

The Court analyzed the necessity of continued incarceration against the applicant's right to liberty.

It noted that the applicant, a 23-year-old laborer, had no previous convictions despite one pending criminal antecedent

The Court observed that since the investigation was complete and the final report submitted, the likelihood of the applicant tampering with evidence was minimal

It was further noted that a co-accused had already been extended the benefit of bail

The Court emphasized the applicant's socio-economic status and his responsibility toward aged parents as factors suggesting he was not a flight risk

Since the offense is triable by a Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) and the trial is expected to take time, the Court found no compelling reason to justify further detention

The holding was made subject to the applicant furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety of the same amount

The Court imposed specific conditions, including: (1) regular attendance at all hearings; (2) abstaining from committing similar offenses; (3) refraining from inducing or threatening witnesses; and (4) ensuring compliance with Section 346 of the BNSS regarding the examination of witnesses

The order remains effective until the conclusion of the trial unless breached