Recovery of stolen property linked by invoices justifies bail rejection despite alleged procedural non-compliance under Section 105 BNSS.

The applicant, Bhole, sought bail following his arrest in connection with F.I.R. No. 15 of 2026 under Sections 305(a), 317(2), 331(4), and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, registered at P.S. SIDCUL, District Haridwar

The prosecution alleged that the applicant, along with co-accused, committed house-trespass and stole household articles, including electronics, jewellery, and cash, valued at approximately Rs. 8–10 lakhs

The applicant contended that he was not named in the F.I.R. and that the police failed to comply with the mandatory videography requirements for search and seizure under Section 105 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023

Conversely, the State argued that the stolen articles were recovered from the applicant’s possession and were linked to the complainant through invoices bearing the name "Neelam"

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in light of the prima facie recovery of stolen articles linked to the complainant

2. Whether the alleged non-compliance with the mandatory procedural requirements of Section 105 of the BNSS, 2023, regarding the recording of search and seizure, warrants the grant of bail

Sections 305(a), 317(2), 331(4), and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023, concerning theft and house-trespass

Section 105 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which mandates the recording of search and seizure procedures through audio-videography or other electronic means

The court observed that the items described in the F.I.R. were prima facie recovered from the applicant’s possession

The ownership of these items was linked to the complainant’s household via specific invoice numbers and the name "Neelam"

Regarding the procedural objection raised by the applicant, the court noted that the applicant failed to provide sufficient verification at this stage to prove that the mandatory audio-videography requirements of Section 105 of the BNSS were bypassed

The court accepted the State counsel's submission that there were no procedural lapses and all directive provisions had been followed

Consequently, the court found that the gravity of the recovery and the direct link to the crime outweighed the applicant's contentions for bail.

The bail application was rejected