Regular bail granted where charge-sheet is filed, the accused has no antecedents, and trial may be prolonged.

The applicant was arrested in connection with Crime No. 08/2026 registered at Police Station Partapur, District Kanker, for an alleged offence under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act.

The prosecution alleged that 25 bulk litres of country-made liquor were illegally recovered from his possession.

The applicant denied the allegation, challenged the seizure as fabricated, and sought regular bail on the grounds that he had been in custody since 29 June 2026, had no criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet had been filed, and the trial was likely to take considerable time.

The State opposed bail on the ground that illegal liquor had been seized from the applicant’s possession.

Whether the applicant should be granted regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with an offence under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act.

Whether the applicant’s custody period, absence of criminal antecedents, filing of the charge-sheet, and the likely delay in conclusion of trial justified release on bail.

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, governing the High Court’s power to grant regular bail.

It considered the settled bail principles requiring assessment of the nature of the allegation, the period of custody, criminal antecedents, the stage of investigation, and the likelihood of delay in trial.

The alleged substantive offence was under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, concerning possession of illegally held liquor.

Bail was granted subject to conditions intended to secure the applicant’s presence, prevent delay, and protect the integrity of the trial.

The Court considered the alleged recovery of 25 bulk litres of country-made liquor and the State’s objection, but found the applicant’s prolonged custody since 29 June 2026, lack of criminal antecedents, filing of the charge-sheet, and the likelihood that the trial would take time to conclude to be sufficient circumstances favouring bail.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the prosecution case, the Court exercised its discretion under Section 483 BNSS and directed release on bail subject to safeguards requiring attendance before the trial court, cooperation with the proceedings, and personal appearance at material stages of the trial.

The applicant, Devnath Usendi, was directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court.

The conditions required him not to seek adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present on each date fixed either personally or through counsel, to comply with proceedings arising from any proclamation, and to appear personally at the opening of the case, framing of charge, and recording of his statement under Section 351 BNSS.

A certified copy of the order was directed to be supplied to the trial court for compliance.