Regular bail granted post-charge sheet considering detention period and trial duration despite criminal history.

The applicant was arrested in connection with Crime No. 616/2025 for allegedly cutting and removing approximately 770kg of LTAB cable from a 25 KVA transformer on 29.10.2025.

The prosecution alleged that the applicant, acting with co-accused in furtherance of common intention, loaded the stolen material into a container vehicle (MP-07-JB-3358) for sale.

The applicant, a scrap collector by profession, argued that the FIR was initially filed against unknown persons, no incriminating material was recovered from him, and no eyewitness or CCTV evidence linked him to the crime.

The applicant has two other criminal antecedents and has been in judicial custody since 24.12.2025.

The charge sheet in the matter has been filed.

Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, considering the period of detention and the filing of the charge sheet.

The Court exercised its discretionary power to grant bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.

The substantive offences alleged fall under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, specifically Sections 303(2) (theft), 317(2), 317(4), 61(2) (criminal conspiracy), 238, and 3(5) (common intention).

The Court also integrated procedural safeguards under Section 269 (punishment for non-attendance), Section 84 (proclamation for person absconding), Section 209 (failure to appear), and Section 351 (evidence in presence of accused) of the BNSS/BNS to ensure the applicant's cooperation during trial.

The Court balanced the gravity of the alleged theft against the procedural progress of the case and the applicant's right to liberty.

While the State highlighted the applicant's criminal antecedents, the Court observed that the investigation was substantially complete as evidenced by the filing of the charge sheet.

The Court took significant note of the applicant’s period of detention (since December 2025) and the fact that the trial would likely consume considerable time.

Without delving into the merits of the scrap collector’s defense or the lack of recovery evidence, the Court determined that continued pre-trial detention was not warranted.

To mitigate the risk of trial delay, the Court imposed strict conditions prohibiting the applicant from seeking adjournments during witness testimony and mandating personal appearance at critical stages like charge framing.

The holding is subject to several conditions: (i) the applicant shall not seek adjournments when witnesses are present; (ii) he must appear on every trial date; and (iii) he must be personally present for the framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 of the BNSS.

Any violation of these conditions allows the trial court to treat the default as an abuse of liberty and proceed in accordance with law.