Parity and Filing of Charge Sheet Warrant Grant of Regular Bail in Liquor Adulteration Case

On January 5, 2026, police raided the residence of co-accused Subhash Dutta and seized 16.920 bulk liters of country-made liquor

Dutta alleged that the Applicant, Anjor Das Gayakwad, was involved in procuring liquor from Madhya Pradesh for adulteration and re-bottling

No contraband was recovered from the physical possession of the Applicant

The Applicant was arrested on January 8, 2026, and remained in custody through the filing of the charge sheet

He sought regular bail on the grounds of false implication and parity with co-accused Jagdish Gaud, who was previously granted bail

Whether the Applicant is entitled to grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS considering the nature of allegations and the principle of parity.

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

Substantive charges were registered under Sections 111(2) and 111(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Sections 34(1), 34(2), and 36 of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act

The Court also adhered to the principle of parity in bail jurisprudence, referencing the prior release of co-accused Jagdish Gaud in MCRC No. 3590/2026

Procedural compliance during bail was guided by Sections 209, 269, and 351 of the BNSS

The Court evaluated the totality of the circumstances, noting that while the prosecution opposed bail due to the filing of the charge sheet, they did not dispute the grant of bail to a similarly situated co-accused

The Court observed that no recovery was made directly from the Applicant’s conscious possession and the prosecution's case rested primarily on the statement of a co-accused

Considering the Applicant’s period of detention since January 8, 2026, the completion of the investigation (filing of the charge sheet), and the likelihood that the trial would not conclude soon, the Court found that continued incarceration was not warranted

To prevent the abuse of liberty, the Court shifted the burden of ensuring trial progress onto the Applicant through specific conduct-based conditions

The Court allowed the bail application and directed the release of the Applicant upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties

The release is subject to conditions including mandatory presence at trial, a prohibition on seeking unnecessary adjournments, and strict penalties under Sections 209 and 269 of the BNS for non-compliance