Regular bail granted after charge-sheet filing where prolonged custody and delayed trial were likely.

The applicant was arrested in connection with Crime No. 40/2026 registered at Police Station Excise Circle, Bagbahra, District Mahasamund, for offences under Sections 34(2), 34(1)(a), 36 and 59(a) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act.

The prosecution alleged that, during patrolling on 17 June 2026, officials recovered 56 bulk litres of country-made liquor from the applicant’s possession.

The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, contending that the liquor was not recovered from his exclusive possession, that he had no criminal antecedents, that he had remained in custody since 17 June 2026, and that trial would take considerable time.

The State opposed bail, asserting that the applicant had two criminal antecedents and that the liquor had been recovered from his possession; it also informed the Court that the charge-sheet had been filed.

After examining the case diary, the Court considered the application.

1. Whether the applicant was entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a prosecution involving the alleged recovery of 56 bulk litres of country-made liquor under the Chhattisgarh Excise Act.

2. Whether the applicant’s period of custody, filing of the charge-sheet, absence of criminal antecedents as found by the Court, and the likely delay in conclusion of trial justified release on bail.

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

The alleged offences arose under Sections 34(2), 34(1)(a), 36 and 59(a) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act.

In determining entitlement to bail, the Court considered the nature and gravity of the allegations, the applicant’s period of incarceration, the filing of the charge-sheet, the applicant’s criminal antecedents, and the likelihood that the trial would take time.

The Court weighed the allegation of recovery of 56 bulk litres of liquor against the applicant’s individual circumstances.

Although the State opposed bail on the basis of the alleged recovery and claimed criminal antecedents, the Court found that the applicant had no criminal antecedent.

It further noted that the applicant had been in custody since 17 June 2026, the charge-sheet had already been filed, and the trial was likely to take some time.

On these considerations, and after examining the case diary, the Court concluded that continued detention was not warranted and that the applicant satisfied the requirements for release on regular bail.

The applicant, Madhav Singh, was directed to be released on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

Bail was subject to conditions requiring him not to seek unnecessary adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present before the trial Court as directed, to comply with proceedings arising from any misuse of bail or non-appearance, and to appear personally on the dates fixed for opening of the case, framing of charge, and recording of his statement under Section 351 of the BNSS.

A certified copy of the order was directed to be transmitted to the trial Court for compliance.