Regular bail granted for substantial liquor seizure where recovery was from premises and not from the applicant's person.

The applicant sought regular bail following his arrest on November 16, 2025, in connection with Crime No. 103/2025.

The Excise Department, acting on confidential information, searched a rented residence at Guruchhaya Apartment, Rajnandgaon, without a warrant.

The search yielded 403.735 bulk liters of illicit liquor (whiskey and beer) and two refrigerators.

The applicant contended that the search was conducted merely on suspicion, that the rental agreement cited by the prosecution was doubtful, and that the liquor was not seized directly from his person.

He has been in custody since the date of arrest, and the charge-sheet has been filed.

Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering the nature of the recovery and his period of incarceration.

The court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), regarding the grant of regular bail.

Substantive charges were brought under Sections 34(2), 36, and 59A of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915, which regulate the illegal possession, transportation, and storage of large quantities of intoxicants.

The court also applied procedural conditions under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) regarding non-appearance and Section 84 of the BNSS regarding proclamations for absconding persons.

The Court observed that while a substantial quantity of illicit liquor (403.735 bulk liters) was recovered from the apartment, the prosecution admitted that the contraband was not seized directly from the person of the applicant.

The Court took into account that the applicant has no prior criminal antecedents and has remained in jail since November 16, 2025.

Furthermore, since the charge-sheet has already been filed and the trial is expected to take a significant amount of time, the Court reasoned that continued pretrial detention was not warranted.

The Court also noted the defense’s argument regarding the lack of a proper search warrant and the infirmities in the rental agreement, which cast doubt on the prosecution's case at this stage.

The bail is subject to specific conditions: the applicant must not seek unnecessary adjournments, must appear on every hearing date unless excused, and must be present for the framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 of the BNSS.

The Court held that given the lack of direct physical seizure and absence of criminal history, the applicant met the criteria for bail during the pendency of the trial.