Bail granted to woman in house-breaking case citing lack of criminal antecedents and prolonged incarceration.

The applicant sought regular bail following her arrest on August 21, 2025, in connection with Crime No. 362/2025 registered at Police Station D.D. Nagar, Raipur.

The prosecution alleged that between August 18 and August 20, 2025, the complainant’s house was broken into while the family was away.

A large quantity of gold and silver jewelry, including necklaces, bangles, rings, and a silver idol, was reported stolen from locked cupboards.

The applicant contended that she was falsely implicated, no seizure was made from her personal possession, and she had no prior criminal record.

The State opposed bail, citing the gravity of the house-breaking and theft.

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering the nature of the allegations and the period of custody.

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), regarding the grant of regular bail.

The offenses charged were under Sections 331(4) (Lurking house-trespass or house-breaking), 305(1) (Theft in a dwelling house, etc.), and 317(2) (Receiving stolen property) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

The court also referenced procedural requirements for securing the presence of the accused under Section 269 (non-attendance in obedience to an order) and Section 209 (failure to appear in court) of the BNS, as well as Section 84 of the BNSS (proclamation for person absconding).

The Court balanced the seriousness of the allegations involving the theft of valuable ornaments against the mitigating factors presented by the applicant.

The Court noted that the applicant had been in custody since December 21, 2025 (approximately 2.5 months at the time of the order), and had no previous criminal antecedents.

Although the State counsel initially claimed the charge-sheet had not been filed, the Court observed that the charge-sheet had indeed been submitted and taken on record by the competent court.

Reasoning that the trial was likely to take significant time and that the applicant's continued detention was not warranted under these circumstances, the Court determined that she was entitled to liberty.

The holding is conditional upon the applicant: (i) not seeking adjournments during evidence; (ii) appearing on all trial dates; (iii) complying with proclamations under Section 84 of the BNSS if issued; and (iv) appearing in person for the opening of the case, framing of charges, and recording of the Section 351 BNSS statement.