01Facts
The applicant was arrested in connection with Crime No. 260/2026 registered at Police Station Pamgarh, District Janjgir-Champa, for an offence under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act.
¶ 1–2The prosecution alleged that, pursuant to secret information received on 21 June 2026, police seized 5.760 litres of country-made liquor and 1.300 litres of beer, totalling 7.060 litres, from the applicant’s shop.
¶ 1–2The applicant claimed false implication and disputed ownership of the seized liquor.
¶ 3He had been in custody since 21 June 2026, had two similar criminal antecedents, had been acquitted in one, and faced a pending case in the other in which the charge-sheet had already been filed.
¶ 3The State opposed bail on the ground that illicit liquor had been seized from the applicant’s shop.
¶ 402Issues
i.Whether the applicant should be granted regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a prosecution under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act.
¶ 1, 5–6ii.Whether the applicant’s custody period, filing of the charge-sheet, anticipated delay in trial, and criminal antecedents justified release on bail.
¶ 3, 603Law Applied
The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, governing the High Court’s power to grant regular bail.
¶ 1In deciding bail, the Court considered the nature of the allegation, the period of custody, the status of investigation and filing of the charge-sheet, the likelihood of delay in conclusion of trial, and the applicant’s criminal antecedents.
¶ 5–6Bail was granted without expressing any opinion on the merits of the prosecution case, subject to conditions securing the applicant’s attendance and preventing misuse of liberty.
¶ 6–8Provisions in the judgment · 5 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483Section 84Section 351
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 269Section 209
04Reasoning
The Court acknowledged the prosecution’s allegation that illicit liquor had been seized from the applicant’s shop but assessed the bail application on the overall circumstances rather than conclusively determining guilt.
¶ 4–6The applicant had remained in custody since 21 June 2026, the charge-sheet had been filed, and the trial was likely to take considerable time.
¶ 3, 6Although he had two similar antecedents, one had ended in acquittal and the other was pending after filing of the charge-sheet.
¶ 3, 6Balancing these factors against the nature of the accusation, the Court found it appropriate to release the applicant on bail, expressly without commenting on the merits.
¶ 605Holding
The High Court allowed the applicant’s first regular bail application and directed his release in Crime No. 260/2026 upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court.
¶ 7–8The bail was made subject to conditions requiring him not to seek adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present before the trial court, to comply with proceedings arising from any failure to appear, 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.
¶ 8Original Court PDF
OMNARAYAN BHARDWAJvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
