Bail may be denied in grave offences while investigation remains incomplete, with liberty after filing of the chargesheet.

The applicant, aged about 55 years and a small jeweller, was arrested on 10.06.2026 in connection with Crime No. 211/2026 registered at Police Station Malkharoda, District Sakti, for offences under Sections 103(1), 331(8), 309(2), 238, 317(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”).

The prosecution alleged that Magan Lal Gabel and Budhwara Bai Gabel were found murdered in their house, following which a report was lodged against unknown persons.

During investigation, co-accused persons allegedly disclosed that they had committed the murders and looted silver anklets and gold ornaments, which were subsequently melted and sold to the applicant.

The applicant claimed that he had purchased the ornaments in the ordinary course of his jewellery business, on the co-accused persons’ representation that the ornaments belonged to them, and that he had no knowledge that they were stolen property.

He also contended that the alleged stolen articles had already been recovered, custodial interrogation was unnecessary, he had no relevant criminal antecedents, and the charge-sheet had not yet been filed.

The State opposed bail on the ground that the applicant was involved in purchasing stolen property, investigation was continuing, and his custodial remand remained necessary.

Whether the applicant should be released on regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, pending investigation into offences arising from the alleged murder and disposal of stolen ornaments?

Whether the applicant’s alleged purchase of the ornaments, recovery of the articles, absence of alleged participation in the murders, and continued custody justified the grant of bail?

The Court considered the applicant’s first regular bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which governs the High Court’s power to grant bail in appropriate cases.

The Court assessed the seriousness and nature of the alleged offences under Sections 103(1), 331(8), 309(2), 238, 317(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023, together with the stage of investigation and the necessity of custodial interrogation.

The governing bail considerations included the gravity and manner of commission of the offence, the possibility of the applicant’s involvement in the crime, the status of investigation, and the likelihood that release at that stage could prejudice the investigation.

The Court acknowledged the applicant’s submissions that he was not alleged to have participated directly in the murders, that the ornaments had been recovered, and that he had purchased them without knowledge of their criminal origin.

However, it gave greater weight to the gravity of the alleged double murder and related offences, the prosecution’s allegation that the applicant had purchased the looted ornaments, and the fact that the investigation had not yet been completed.

The Court also accepted the State’s submission that the possibility of the applicant’s involvement in other offences connected with the same crime could not be ruled out.

In view of these circumstances, the Court held that the case was not fit for grant of bail at the investigation stage, notwithstanding the applicant’s claim that custodial interrogation was unnecessary.

The applicant was granted liberty to revive the bail application after filing of the charge-sheet.

The Registry was directed to provide a certified copy of the order to the concerned trial court for information and compliance.