Grant of regular bail on ground of parity and period of incarceration for illicit liquor possession.

The applicant, Leelesh Sinha, was arrested on December 25, 2025, following a police raid on his house in Village Saloni.

Based on secret information, officials from Police Station Keregaon seized 270 bulk liters of handmade illegal liquor from his possession.

The applicant was charged under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915, in connection with Crime No. 27/2025.

The applicant sought regular bail, contending false implication, the filing of the charge-sheet, and parity with a co-accused, Dhaneshwar Sinha, who had been granted bail on February 27, 2026.

The State opposed the bail, noting the applicant's three criminal antecedents, though the applicant clarified he had been acquitted in two of those cases.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, based on the principle of parity and the duration of his pretrial detention.

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, governing the High Court's power to grant bail.

Substantively, the case involved Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915, which prescribes a minimum punishment of one year and a maximum of three years for illegal liquor possession.

The Court also invoked the principle of parity in bail jurisprudence, ensuring that similarly situated accused persons are treated equally unless distinguishing factors exist.

Procedural compliance during bail was framed under Sections 269 (punishment for non-attendance), 84 (proclamation for person absconding), 209 (failure to appear), and 351 (recording of statement) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and BNSS.

The Court weighed the nature and gravity of the allegations against the applicant's period of incarceration since late 2025.

It observed that the investigation was largely complete as the charge-sheet had already been filed before the competent court.

Crucially, the Court noted that the State did not dispute that an identically situated co-accused, Dhaneshwar Sinha, had already been enlarged on bail by the same Court in MCRC No. 1995 of 2026.

Despite the applicant’s criminal history, the Court found the explanation of prior acquittals and the pending status of only one other case sufficient when balanced against the principle of parity and the potential sentence length under the Excise Act.

The applicant was ordered to be released on a personal bond with two sureties, subject to several conditions: (i) an undertaking not to seek unnecessary adjournments; (ii) mandatory presence on all trial dates; (iii) personal appearance for framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 BNSS; and (iv) strict compliance with BNS/BNSS provisions regarding attendance, failing which the trial court may treat it as an abuse of liberty.