Bail granted in excise offense involving 30 liters of liquor due to lack of criminal antecedents.

The applicant was arrested on February 17, 2026, following a raid by the Excise Circle Kasdol, which resulted in the seizure of 30 liters of handmade country liquor from his possession

He was charged under Sections 34(2) and 59(a) of the C.G. Excise Act

The applicant moved the High Court for regular bail, contending that he was falsely implicated, had no criminal antecedents, and that the charge-sheet had already been filed

The State opposed the bail citing the quantity of liquor seized

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering the nature of the offense and the period of incarceration

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

Sections 34(2) and 59(a) of the C.G. Excise Act, where the court noted the sentencing range is between one to three years

Sections 269 (non-appearance), 84 (proclamation for person absconding), 209 (failure to appear), and 351 (recording of statement) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and BNSS as conditions for the continued liberty of the accused

The Court balanced the gravity of the allegations against the applicant's personal profile and procedural status.

It observed that the investigation had effectively concluded as the charge-sheet had been filed

Key to the court's reasoning was the fact that the applicant had no prior criminal record ("no criminal antecedents") and had been in custody since February 17, 2026

Given that a trial usually takes significant time to conclude and the maximum punishment for the offense is three years, the Court determined that continued pre-trial detention was unnecessary, provided stringent conditions were imposed to ensure the applicant's presence during trial

The holding was conditioned upon the applicant's strict adherence to trial schedules, prohibition against seeking unnecessary adjournments, and mandatory presence during key trial stages such as framing of charges

The Court directed the trial court to treat any default or abuse of liberty as grounds for initiating proceedings under the BNSS and BNS