Regular bail granted despite criminal antecedents where charge-sheet was filed and trial was likely to be prolonged.

The applicant was arrested in connection with Crime No. 278/2026 registered at City Kotwali Police Station, Raigarh, for offences under Sections 20(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act.

The prosecution alleged that, pursuant to secret information, contraband was recovered from the house of co-accused Irshad Khan and that the applicant was implicated on the basis of the co-accused’s memorandum.

The applicant had been in custody since 25 May 2026, and the charge-sheet had been filed.

He had 21 criminal antecedents under the IPC, Excise Act, Gambling Act and BNS; 18 cases had been disposed of and 3 remained pending.

This was the applicant’s second bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. His first application had been rejected on 22 July 2026 principally because he had not explained his criminal antecedents.

Whether the applicant was entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, despite the offences alleged under Sections 20(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act and his criminal antecedents.

Whether the filing of the charge-sheet, the period of custody, and the likelihood of delay in conclusion of the trial justified grant of bail.

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, governing the High Court’s power to grant regular bail, and Sections 20(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act, concerning possession of cannabis and criminal conspiracy or abetment in relation to narcotic offences.

In exercising its bail jurisdiction, the Court considered the filing of the charge-sheet, the applicant’s period of incarceration, the likely duration of the trial, and his antecedents as relevant factors.

The bail order was also made subject to conditions requiring the applicant’s attendance, cooperation with the trial, and compliance with directions relating to evidence, framing of charge, examination under Section 351 of the BNSS, proclamation proceedings, and misuse of bail.

The Court noted that the applicant’s previous bail application had been rejected because of his 21 criminal antecedents, but the present application disclosed that 18 of those cases had already been disposed of and only 3 were pending.

Although the antecedents remained a relevant adverse circumstance, the Court also took into account that the charge-sheet had been submitted, the applicant had remained in custody since 25 May 2026, and the trial was likely to take considerable time.

On an assessment of these cumulative circumstances, the Court concluded that continued incarceration was not necessary pending trial and that the applicant could be released subject to stringent conditions securing his presence and preventing misuse of bail.

The applicant, Mohammad Washim, was directed to be released on bail in Crime No. 278/2026 upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

The release was subject to conditions requiring him not to seek unnecessary adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present before the trial Court, to comply with proceedings arising from any proclamation, 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.