Regular Bail Granted After Charge-Sheet Filing and Prolonged Custody Despite Similar Pending Cases

The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No. 101/2025, registered under Sections 305(a) and 331(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The prosecution alleged that a house was burgled while its occupants were away and that cash and jewellery were stolen. During investigation, the applicant and co-accused allegedly disclosed their involvement in the offence; the stolen articles had been recovered in connection with another crime. A charge-sheet was filed.

The applicant had been in custody since 17 March 2025. His first and second bail applications had been dismissed on merits; the State opposed the third application, citing pending similar cases.

The Court noted that the applicant had been released on bail in Crime No. 366/2024.

1. Whether the applicant should be released on regular bail in the present case, notwithstanding the dismissal of his earlier bail applications and the State’s objection based on alleged criminal antecedents.

2. Whether the applicant’s custody, filing of the charge-sheet, and release on bail in the related case supported granting bail.

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, empowers the High Court to grant regular bail. The alleged offences were under Sections 305(a) and 331(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The Court applied its discretion to the circumstances before it, including the applicant’s period in custody, completion of investigation and filing of the charge-sheet, the basis on which the three FIRs were registered, and the applicant’s release on bail in the other pending case.

No precedent was cited.

The Court considered that three FIRs had been registered against the applicant on the same date on the basis of co-accused persons’ memorandum statements.

It also took account of the filing of the charge-sheet, the applicant’s custody since 17 March 2025, and his release on bail in Crime No. 366/2024. On those circumstances, and without expressing any view on the merits, the Court found it appropriate to grant bail despite the State’s opposition and the earlier dismissals.

The applicant was directed to be released upon executing a personal bond of ₹50,000 with one surety in the like amount, subject to conditions that he not influence or threaten persons acquainted with the case, not prejudice a fair and expeditious trial, and attend every trial-court hearing until disposal of the case.

The Court clarified that its observations were limited to the bail application and would not affect the trial court’s independent assessment on the merits.