Regular bail granted for illicit liquor possession where charge-sheet is filed and trial is pending.

The applicant, Anand Bishra, was arrested on February 22, 2026, following the recovery of 120 bulk liters of handmade Mahuwa liquor and 2 kg of fermented Mahuwa (Lahan) allegedly intended for sale.

A First Information Report (FIR) was registered as Crime No. 67/2026 at Police Station Saraipali under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act.

The applicant moved for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), contending false implication and noting that despite one past antecedent (since disposed of), he had been in custody since the date of the incident and the investigation was complete with the filing of the charge sheet.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS considering the nature of the offense, the period of incarceration, and the status of the investigation.

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which governs the power of the High Court to grant bail.

Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, which prescribes a minimum punishment of one year and a maximum of three years for illegal possession of liquor.

Procedural safeguards under Sections 209 (contempt/non-appearance), 269 (punishment for non-attendance), and 351 (recording of statement) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Section 84 of the BNSS (proclamation for person absconding) to ensure the applicant’s presence during trial.

The Court evaluated the "facts and circumstances," specifically the gravity of the allegations involving 120 liters of Mahuwa liquor against the duration of the applicant’s detention since February 22, 2026.

Although the State opposed bail citing one disposed-of criminal antecedent and the quantity of liquor seized, the Court noted that the charge sheet had already been filed, thereby concluding the investigative stage.

The Court reasoned that since the trial was likely to take significant time and the applicant had already spent over two months in custody for an offense carrying a maximum three-year sentence, continued pretrial detention was not warranted, provided strict conditions were imposed to prevent the abuse of liberty.

The holding is contingent upon several conditions: the applicant must not seek unnecessary adjournments, must be present for framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 BNSS, and must comply with all trial schedules, failing which the trial court may proceed under Sections 209 or 269 of the BNS.