Filing of charge-sheet and prolonged custody justify grant of regular bail in theft cases.

On November 24, 2025, the complainant filed an FIR alleging that 250 liters of diesel (valued at approximately ₹23,560) were siphoned from his truck parked near a petrol pump in Surajpur

The applicant was apprehended and implicated based on suspicion and has been in custody since December 11, 2025

Following the investigation, the police filed a charge-sheet against the applicant for theft under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita

The applicant moved the High Court for regular bail, asserting his innocence and noting that the trial would likely be protracted

Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in light of the nature of the allegations and his period of incarceration

The court primarily applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which governs the High Court's power to grant regular bail

The substantive charge was Section 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, which pertains to the punishment for theft

The court also invoked procedural mandates under the BNSS to ensure trial attendance, specifically referencing Section 269 (penalties for non-attendance), Section 84 (proclamations for absconding persons), Section 209 (proceedings for non-appearance), and Section 351 (recording of the accused's statement)

While the State opposed bail citing the applicant’s two criminal antecedents, the Court observed that the investigation was complete as the charge-sheet had already been filed

The Court balanced the nature of the allegations (theft of fuel) against the applicant’s right to liberty, noting he had been in jail since December 2025

Given that the conclusion of the trial was expected to take considerable time, the Court found that further pretrial detention was not warranted, provided that strict conditions were imposed to ensure the applicant's cooperation with the judicial process and to prevent the abuse of bail

The holding was conditioned upon the applicant furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties and adhering to several mandates: (i) filing an undertaking not to seek adjournments during witness testimony; (ii) appearing personally on all trial dates; and (iii) appearing specifically for the framing of charges and the recording of statements under Section 351 of the BNSS

Failure to comply would empower the trial court to treat the default as an abuse of liberty and proceed in accordance with law