Regular bail granted considering filed charge-sheet, prolonged custody, and the likelihood of delayed trial.

The applicant was arrested on 19 June 2026 in connection with Crime No. 940/2026 registered at Police Station Sarkanda, Bilaspur, for offences under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”).

The prosecution alleged that the accused persons obtained a total sum of ₹4,00,000 under the Government Snakebite/Poisonous Animal Bite Death Assistance Scheme by presenting false facts, thereby causing wrongful gain to themselves.

The applicant denied the allegations, contending that he had neither received any benefit nor committed the alleged offences, and that he had been implicated on the basis of suspicion and a memorandum statement. He also relied on the alleged delay in lodging the FIR, the grant of bail to a co-accused, and the period of custody already undergone.

The State opposed bail, alleging the applicant’s involvement in receiving the scheme amount and pointing out that he had one criminal antecedent; however, the charge-sheet had already been filed.

1. Whether the applicant should be enlarged on regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in view of the nature of the allegations and the material placed on record.

2. Whether the applicant’s period of pre-trial detention, filing of the charge-sheet, likelihood of delay in trial, and parity with the bailed co-accused justified the grant of bail.

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”), which empowers the High Court or Court of Session to grant regular bail to a person accused of an offence and in custody.

The Court considered the established bail principles requiring assessment of the nature and gravity of the allegations, the material available, the period of custody, the stage of investigation, the likelihood of the trial taking time, and the possibility of misuse of liberty.

The alleged offences were those punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.

The Court considered the competing submissions and examined the documents filed with the bail application.

Although the prosecution alleged that the applicant had obtained wrongful gain under the Government assistance scheme and noted one criminal antecedent, the investigation had concluded and the charge-sheet had been filed.

The Court also took into account that the applicant had remained in custody since 19 June 2026 and that the trial was likely to take some time.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the prosecution case, these circumstances were found sufficient to justify release on bail. The Court accordingly exercised its discretion under Section 483 BNSS in favour of the applicant.

The applicant was directed to be released upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹25,000 with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court.

Bail was subject to conditions requiring the applicant not to seek adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, to appear personally on the dates fixed for opening of the case, framing of charge and recording of his statement under Section 351 BNSS, and to comply with all directions concerning attendance and non-misuse of bail.

A certified copy of the order was directed to be sent to the Trial Court for compliance.