Filing of charge-sheet and prolonged custody warrant regular bail under BNSS despite prior criminal history.

The applicant, Tejkumar, was arrested in connection with Crime No. 191/2025 registered at Police Station Sankara for the alleged possession of 120 bulk liters of handmade country liquor

The police acted on secret information and conducted a search and seizure at the place of incident

The applicant contended that he was falsely implicated and that the police prepared a false seizure memo

The applicant has been in judicial custody since December 15, 2025

The State opposed the bail, noting that the charge-sheet had already been filed and that the applicant had two previous criminal antecedents

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, despite having criminal antecedents, given the duration of his custody and the filing of the charge-sheet

The Court primarily applied Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the grant of regular bail

The applicant was charged under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act

The Court further integrated procedural safeguards and penalties for bail default under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for non-appearance

Section 84 of the BNSS regarding proclamations

Section 209 of the BNS for failure to appear

Section 351 of the BNSS regarding the recording of the accused's statement

The Court balanced the gravity of the allegations under the Excise Act against the procedural status of the case.

It observed that the investigation had effectively concluded as the charge-sheet was already filed before the competent court

Although the State emphasized the applicant's two criminal antecedents, the Court found that the applicant's incarceration since December 15, 2025, and the likelihood that the trial would consume significant time, favored the grant of bail

To mitigate the risk of flight or trial delay, the Court imposed stringent conditions, including a prohibition on seeking adjournments during evidence and mandatory personal appearance during key trial stages like charge framing and statement recording

The holding is conditioned upon the applicant not seeking adjournments during witness testimony

The applicant must appear personally for the opening of the case, framing of charges, and recording of statements under Section 351 of the BNSS

The Court ordered that any misuse of liberty or failure to appear in response to a proclamation would trigger proceedings under Sections 209 and 269 of the BNS