Bail is conditional on verification that the accused has no property-offence antecedents.

The petitioner sought bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Balasore Sadar P.S. Case No. 394 of 2026, arising from allegations of conspiracy to commit dacoity at a bank.

The alleged offences were under Sections 311, 249(b), 111(5) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read with Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act

The petitioner argued that his alleged role was limited to harbouring the co-accused and that he had no direct nexus with the crime; counsel also undertook that bail should be withheld if the petitioner had a property-offence antecedent

The order refusing bail recorded allegations that the petitioner had harboured the alleged robbers and shown them jewellery shops and banks, including the branch where the offence was committed

The petitioner had been in custody since 3 August 2026

Whether the petitioner should be admitted to bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, given the allegations of harbouring the co-accused and participating in the conspiracy

Whether bail should be subject to verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents for property offences, as proposed by his counsel

Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, provides the basis for the High Court’s consideration of the bail application

The alleged offences were charged under Sections 311, 249(b), 111(5) and 61(2) of the BNS, read with Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act

The judgment cites no precedent and sets out no broader bail test; it records that the Court considered the materials on record, the petitioner’s period of pre-trial detention, and the proposed verification of property-offence antecedents

Although the materials recorded in the order refusing bail indicated that the petitioner may have facilitated the alleged robbers and taken part in the conspiracy, the Court considered those materials alongside the petitioner’s custody since 3 August 2026 and counsel’s submission concerning property-offence antecedents

Without expressing any view on the merits, the Court granted bail subject to verification of those antecedents and imposed a consequence if such an antecedent was found

It directed the petitioner’s release on a bond of Rs. 50,000 with two solvent sureties for the like amount, subject to terms set by the court in seisin of the case and excluding cash surety

The benefit of the order was not to extend to the petitioner if he was found to have a criminal antecedent for a property offence, unless he obtained leave of the Court