Bail granted where witnesses failed to identify accused and no recovery was made during investigation.

The applicant, Mohammad Siraj, was arrested on 27.01.2026 in connection with Crime No. 05/2026 for the snatching of a mobile phone and cash from the complainant, Parmeshwari Porte, on 01.01.2026.

The prosecution alleged that the applicant and a co-accused fled on a motorcycle upon seeing police.

The applicant filed this first bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), contending that he was falsely implicated, no seizures were made from his possession, and two key prosecution witnesses (including the complainant) failed to identify him during trial.

The State opposed the bail, noting that the charge-sheet had already been filed.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail considering the evidence on record and the duration of his incarceration.

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

Substantive offense under Section 304(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

Procedural safeguards under Sections 84 (proclamation for person absconding), 209 (punishment for non-appearance), 269 (non-attendance in obedience to order), and 351 (recording of statement of accused) of the BNSS and BNS.

The Court balanced the gravity of the allegations against the evidentiary developments and the applicant's personal liberty.

It took significant note of the fact that the complainant and another witness did not recognize the applicant during their examination.

The Court observed that no physical evidence (mobile phone or cash) was seized from the applicant.

While the applicant had one other criminal antecedent, the Court noted it was also currently under judicial consideration.

Given that the charge-sheet had been filed, the applicant had been in custody since January 2026, and the trial was expected to be prolonged, the Court determined that continued incarceration was unnecessary, provided stringent conditions were imposed to secure his presence during the trial.

The Court allowed the bail application and ordered the release of the applicant upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, subject to specific conditions including mandatory attendance and warnings under Sections 209 and 269 of the BNS.