Filing of charge sheet and prolonged detention justify regular bail despite existing criminal antecedents.

On August 16, 2025, a Junior Engineer of the CSPDCL lodged an FIR alleging the theft of L.T. AB cable and transformer articles from the Akaltara Rural and Kotgarh Distribution Center, valued at approximately Rs. 1,50,000.

The applicant, a driver by profession, was arrested on December 22, 2025, alongside ten other accused persons.

Following the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Akaltara, docketed as Criminal Case No. 60/2026.

The applicant sought regular bail, arguing that he was merely an employee with no criminal intent or knowledge of the stolen goods.

The State opposed the application, citing three criminal antecedents, including one in Rajasthan.

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, despite having criminal antecedents.

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the grant of regular bail.

The substantive charges were framed under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, specifically Section 303(2) (theft), Section 317(2) (receiving stolen property), Section 238 (causing disappearance of evidence), Section 317(4) (habitually dealing in stolen property), Section 61(2) (criminal conspiracy), and Section 3(5) (common intention).

Procedural mandates under BNSS Sections 84 (proclamation for person absconding), 209 (punishment for non-appearance), 269 (attendance of accused), and 351 (examination of accused) to establish bail conditions.

The court noted that the investigation was complete and the charge-sheet had been filed, signifying that the applicant's custodial interrogation was no longer required.

The Court took significant account of the applicant's period of detention since December 22, 2025, and the reality that the trial was unlikely to conclude in the near future.

Despite the State’s objection regarding antecedents, the Court determined that the applicant's role as a driver and the stage of the proceedings justified release, provided the liberty was checked by stringent conditions to prevent the abuse of bail and ensure attendance during trial.

The holding is subject to strict conditions, including: a prohibition on seeking adjournments when witnesses are present; mandatory personal appearance for the framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 BNSS; and a warning that failure to appear would trigger proceedings under Section 209 of the BNS and Section 84 of the BNSS.