Bail may be granted where the applicant lacks criminal antecedents and the primary dispute is personal.

The applicant filed a first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).

The prosecution alleged that on November 17, 2025, the co-accused (Rajesh Shrivastav) demanded money from his father, the complainant, for liquor and motorcycle repairs.

Upon refusal, the co-accused followed the complainant home with the applicant, where they allegedly assaulted the complainant and set his shop on fire, causing a loss of approximately ₹70,000.

The applicant was arrested on November 19, 2025, in connection with Crime No. 558/2025.

Counsel for the applicant argued that the dispute was personal between the complainant and his son, the applicant had no criminal antecedents, and the charge-sheet had already been filed.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS considering the nature of the accusations and his period of detention.

The Court considered the provisions for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.

The applicant was charged under Sections 333 (House-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint), 119(1) (Punishment for abetment), 326(g) (Mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to destroy house, etc.), 296 (Obscene acts and songs), 115(2) (Voluntarily causing hurt), 351(2) (Criminal intimidation), and 3(5) (Joint liability/Common intention) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

The Court’s discretion was guided by the absence of criminal antecedents and the completion of the investigation (filing of the charge-sheet).

The Court balanced the gravity of the allegations—specifically that the applicant assisted the co-accused in demanding money and committing arson—against the procedural status of the case.

It noted that the applicant had been in detention since November 19, 2025.

Crucially, the Court observed that the charge-sheet had already been filed, suggesting that custodial interrogation was no longer required.

Given that the applicant had no prior criminal record and the trial was expected to take time, the Court determined that continued incarceration was unnecessary, provided stringent conditions were imposed to ensure the applicant's presence during trial proceedings.

The holding was predicated on the filing of the charge-sheet and the lack of criminal history.

The release is subject to conditions including: (i) no seeking of adjournments during witness testimony, (ii) mandatory appearance on trial dates under penalty of Section 269 BNS, and (iii) specific personal appearance for framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 BNSS.