Regular bail warranted where charge-sheet is filed, applicants lack antecedents, and trial may be prolonged.

The ten applicants were arrested on 26 July 2026 in connection with Crime No. 73/2026 registered at Police Station Bagbahar, District Jashpur, for alleged offences under Sections 4, 5, 6 and 10 of the Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act, 2004.

The prosecution alleged that the applicants took a calf belonging to Ranjit Ekka, slaughtered it at Kotba Baigabahar Bargoda, and cut it into pieces for consumption.

Acting on this information, the police conducted a naka and allegedly recovered approximately 55 kg of beef/meat from a sack being transported on a motorcycle.

The applicants denied the allegations, asserted false implication, and contended that there was no direct allegation of slaughter or recovery from their exclusive possession.

The charge-sheet had been filed, the applicants had no criminal antecedents, and the trial was likely to take time.

Whether the applicants were entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, during the pendency of the trial.

Whether the filing of the charge-sheet, absence of criminal antecedents, nature of the allegations, and likelihood of delay in 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 also considered the alleged offences under Sections 4, 5, 6 and 10 of the Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act, 2004.

In deciding bail, the Court considered the nature and gravity of the allegations, the stage of the proceedings, filing of the charge-sheet, the applicants’ criminal antecedents, and the probable duration of the trial.

No judicial precedent was cited or relied upon in the order.

The Court considered the competing submissions regarding the alleged recovery and the applicants’ involvement, but expressly refrained from commenting on the merits of the case.

The decisive factors were that the charge-sheet had already been filed, the applicants had no criminal antecedents, and the trial was likely to take considerable time.

On an overall assessment of the nature of the allegations and the circumstances relevant to pre-trial liberty, the Court found it appropriate to grant regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS.

The Court directed that all applicants be released on regular bail upon furnishing a bond of ₹25,000 each with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.

Bail was subject to conditions requiring them not to seek adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present before the trial court as directed, to comply with proceedings relating to proclamation and absence, and to appear personally on the dates fixed for opening of the case, framing of charge, and recording of statements under Section 351 of the BNSS.

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