Regular bail granted where charge-sheet is filed, no criminal antecedents exist, and trial is likely to be prolonged.

The applicant was arrested on 13 August 2026 in connection with Crime No. 138/2026 registered by the Excise Circle, Ambikapur, District Sarguja, for alleged offences under Sections 34(1), 34(2), 38 and 59(a) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act.

The prosecution alleged that the applicant and co-accused, who was working at a liquor shop, were involved in mixing expensive liquor with cheaper liquor. During an inspection, the Excise authorities allegedly seized 16 litres of liquor.

The applicant filed his first application for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, contending that he was innocent, had been falsely implicated, had no specific role attributed to him, had remained in custody since 13 August 2026, and that the charge-sheet had already been filed.

The State opposed bail on the ground of the applicant’s direct involvement, but conceded that he had no criminal antecedents and that the charge-sheet had been filed.

Whether the applicant should be released on regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with the alleged offences under the Excise Act.

Whether the applicant’s lack of criminal antecedents, filing of the charge-sheet, period of custody, and likelihood of delay in trial justified the grant of bail.

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which empowers the High Court to grant regular bail.

In exercising this discretion, the Court considered the nature of the allegations, the materials collected, the applicant’s criminal antecedents, the filing of the charge-sheet, the period of custody, and the likely duration of the trial.

Bail was granted subject to conditions intended to secure the applicant’s presence, prevent adjournment-related delay, and regulate misuse of the liberty of bail.

The Court considered the allegations of illegal mixing of liquor and the alleged seizure of 16 litres, but did not make any final observation on the merits.

The applicant had no criminal antecedents, had been in custody since 13 August 2026, and the charge-sheet had already been filed, thereby reducing the immediate concern of custodial investigation.

The Court also found that the trial was likely to take considerable time.

Balancing these circumstances against the prosecution’s allegation of direct involvement, the Court held that the applicant had made out a case for bail.

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

The release was made subject to conditions requiring him not to seek adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present before the Trial Court on each date either personally or through counsel, 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, and to comply with the consequences of non-appearance or misuse of bail.

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