Bail Granted to Student with No Antecedents Pending Trial for Alleged Detonation of Low-Intensity Explosive.

The applicant, a 21-year-old student, was arrested on March 18, 2026, in connection with Crime No. 153/2026 at P.S. Omati, Jabalpur

The prosecution alleged that on March 16, 2026, the applicant and co-accused exploded a "sutli bomb" in front of Court Room No. 1 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, disrupting judicial proceedings

The applicant sought regular bail, contending that he was implicated solely based on inadmissible self-incriminating statements and co-accused confessions, with no CCTV footage or eye-witnesses linking him to the crime

The State opposed the bail citing the gravity of the offense but conceded the applicant had no criminal antecedents

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 evidence and his personal circumstances

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

Offenses registered under Sections 125 (act endangering life or personal safety), 287 (negligent conduct with respect to explosive substance), 132 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of duty), and 3(5) (joint liability) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

Established principles regarding the admissibility of police confessions and the socio-economic factors relevant to bail, such as the risk of recidivism and the applicant's status as a student.

The Court observed that the applicant's involvement was primarily documented through a memorandum statement, the veracity of which remains a matter for trial.

It noted that the applicant has no prior criminal record and is a student, suggesting a low risk of fleeing from justice or recidivism.

The Court found merit in the argument that prolonged incarceration of a young individual without established criminal antecedents was unnecessary, especially since the trial is expected to take time and there was no immediate evidence of tampering with witnesses.

The court emphasized that the gravity of the allegations must be balanced against the lack of incriminating material recovered directly from the applicant and his clean past.

The Court allowed the application and directed the release of Anuj Rajpoot on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the like amount, subject to conditions including regular court attendance, refraining from similar offenses, and non-interference with witnesses or evidence.