Grant of bail for 50 liters of Mahua liquor seizure involving young first-time offenders in prolonged custody.

On January 20, 2026, the applicants, Karan Ajay and Dinesh Sidar (both aged 19), were arrested by the Saraipali Police for allegedly transporting 50 bulk liters of handmade Mahua liquor on a motorcycle.

The prosecution alleged the seizure occurred near village Kendudhar following a secret tip.

The applicants contended that they were falsely implicated due to a dispute, were merely standing in a public place, and that mandatory search and seizure procedures were violated.

They filed this first bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, having been in judicial custody since the date of arrest.

1. Whether the applicants are entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS considering their age, the nature of the offense, and the duration of their custody.

The Court applied Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, which carries a maximum punishment of three years.

The court relied on Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the power to grant bail.

It further considered the guidelines for arrest and detention established by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in *Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar*, *Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI*, and *Md. Asfak Alam v. State of Jharkhand*, which emphasize restraint in arrests for offenses punishable by less than seven years.

Procedural compliance during trial was governed by Sections 269 (non-attendance), 84 (proclamation for person absconding), 209 (punishment for non-appearance), and 351 (examination of accused) of the BNSS.

The Court evaluated the gravity of the allegations alongside the mitigating factors presented by the applicants.

It noted that the charge-sheet had already been filed and that the applicants, both 19 years old, had no prior criminal antecedents.

The Court observed that the applicants had been incarcerated since January 20, 2026, and that the trial’s conclusion would likely take significant time.

By weighing the statutory maximum sentence (three years) against the period already served and the lack of flight risk (as permanent residents), the Court determined that continued pre-trial detention was unnecessary.

The holding directed the release of Karan Ajay and Dinesh Sidar upon furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties each.

The relief was granted subject to strict conditions: the applicants must not seek unnecessary adjournments, must appear at every hearing (specifically for framing charges and Section 351 statements), and must comply with all procedural mandates under the BNSS or risk revocation of bail.