Bail granted post-charge sheet filing despite criminal antecedents considering roles and prolonged pre-trial detention.

On November 26, 2025, a Junior Engineer of CSPDCL reported the theft of L.T. AB cable wires valued at approximately ₹86,724 from the Akaltara Rural Distribution Center

The applicant, a driver by profession, was arrested on December 22, 2025, along with ten others and implicated in three related criminal cases

The prosecution alleged the applicant’s involvement in the theft and transportation of the stolen property

Conversely, the applicant contended he was merely a driver acting under employment instructions without criminal intent or knowledge of the stolen goods

Following the completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed, and the matter is currently pending trial as Criminal Case No. 58/2026

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering his period of detention and the status of the investigation

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

The substantive charges were brought under Sections 303(2) (theft), 317(2) (stolen property), 238 (causing disappearance of evidence), 317(4) (habitual dealing in stolen property), 61(2) (criminal conspiracy), and 3(5) (common intention) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023

The Court also considered the principle that bail may be granted when the investigation is complete (charge-sheet filed) and the trial is expected to be prolonged

The Court evaluated the application by balancing the gravity of the allegations against the applicant's procedural standing and the nature of his involvement.

It noted that the applicant had been in custody since December 22, 2025, and that the investigation had concluded with the filing of the charge-sheet

While the State opposed bail citing the applicant's criminal antecedents—including two other cases in the same police station and one in Rajasthan—the Court observed that the trial was likely to take significant time to conclude

Without delving into the merits of the evidence regarding the applicant’s role as a driver, the Court determined that further pretrial detention was unnecessary given the current stage of the proceedings

The Court ordered the applicant to be released on a personal bond with two local sureties, subject to several conditions: (i) an undertaking not to seek unnecessary adjournments; (ii) mandatory presence at every trial date; and (iii) strict appearance for the framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 of the BNSS

Failure to comply would allow the trial court to treat the default as an abuse of the liberty of bail