Bail Granted Where Charge Sheet Was Filed, Trial Was Delayed, and Absconding or Witness Threat Was Unlikely

The three petitioners—Balia @ Balaram Naik, Bubunu Sahoo @amp; Sahu, and Jugal Kishore Sahu—filed applications under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), seeking bail in Rengali P.S. Case No. 119 of 2026, corresponding to G.R. (CT) Case No. 777 of 2026, pending before the JMFC (Cognizance Taking), Talcher.

The prosecution alleged that the petitioners were involved in stealing approximately 7,000 kg of copper wires and 20,000 litres of transformer oil, punishable under Sections 303(2), 317(2), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

The allegations against the petitioners concerned either transporting the stolen articles in a Mahindra Neo Bolero vehicle or receiving the stolen property.

They had remained in custody since 10 June 2026, and the charge sheet had been filed by the time of consideration of the bail applications.

Whether the petitioners should be released on bail under Section 483 of the BNSS in view of the nature of the allegations, the period of pre-trial detention, and the filing of the charge sheet?

Whether the record disclosed any substantial likelihood that the petitioners would abscond or threaten or influence prosecution witnesses if released on bail?

The Court applied Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, which empowers the High Court to grant bail in appropriate cases.

It considered the offences alleged under Sections 303(2), 317(2), and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.

The Court also applied the established bail principles requiring consideration of the nature and gravity of the accusation, the period of custody, the stage of investigation and trial, the filing of the charge sheet, the possibility of absconding or tampering with evidence, and the accused’s entitlement to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

The Court weighed the seriousness of the alleged theft and the petitioners’ respective roles in transporting or receiving the stolen articles against the circumstances favouring release on bail.

It noted that the petitioners had been in custody since 10 June 2026, that the charge sheet had already been submitted, and that the trial was unlikely to commence in the near future.

The Court further found no material suggesting that the petitioners would abscond or pose a threat to prosecution witnesses if released.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the prosecution case, and while recognising the petitioners’ presumption of innocence, the Court concluded that continued pre-trial detention was not warranted.

The Court directed that Balia @ Balaram Naik, Bubunu Sahoo @ Sahu, and Jugal Kishore Sahu be released on bail upon furnishing bonds of ₹50,000 each with two solvent sureties for the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court below, subject to such further conditions as that court deemed fit and proper.

Cash surety was expressly excluded.

The connected BLAPLs were disposed of, and the order was directed to be communicated electronically to the concerned court and jail authorities.