Grant of Bail for Possession of Illicit Liquor Where Exclusive Possession is Not Established Prima Facie.

The applicant, Manish, was arrested on January 28, 2026, in connection with Crime No. 07/2026 for the alleged possession of 105.480 bulk liters of Indian Made Foreign Liquor found near his house during a police raid at Kanjar Dera

This is the applicant's second bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS; the first was withdrawn on February 12, 2026, with liberty to provide an explanation for criminal antecedents

The applicant contended he was falsely implicated, the liquor was not in his conscious possession, and the investigation is complete

The State opposed the bail citing three criminal antecedents, though the applicant clarified he had no major convictions

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, for an offence under the M.P. Excise Act, 1915

The court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (corresponding to Section 439 of the CrPC), governing the High Court's power to grant bail

It further applied Section 34(2) of the M.P. Excise Act, 1915, regarding the unlawful possession of liquor

The court also evaluated the necessity of Section 309 of the CrPC / Section 346 of the BNSS regarding the expeditious conduct of proceedings and examination of witnesses during trial

The Court observed that the illicit liquor was recovered from a place near the applicant's house rather than from his direct or "conscious" possession, a point which the Court deemed to have prima facie merit

Regarding criminal history, the Court noted that the applicant is a 23-year-old agriculturist with no "substantial criminal past" or convictions for major offences; one prior case resulted in only a TRC (Till Rising of the Court) sentence and fine

The Court reasoned that since the final report has been submitted and the trial is triable by a Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC), there is no immediate risk of tampering with evidence or the applicant fleeing from justice

The Court concluded that continued incarceration was unnecessary given the applicant’s socio-economic status and family responsibilities

The holding is contingent upon conditions including: (i) regular appearance in court, (ii) non-participation in similar offences, and (iii) no tampering with evidence or witnesses

The order remains effective until the conclusion of the trial unless breached