Regular bail under BNSS Section 483 requires accused's physical presence or surrender establishing judicial custody; interim bail without compliance does not suffice, rendering application non-maintainable.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.

1. Heard Mr. Siddharth Agarwal, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, learned counsel appearing for the A.C.B.

2. I.A. No. 876 of 2026 has been filed for ignoring the defect No. 20, as pointed out by the office.

3. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that so far as defect No. 20 is concerned, the vakalatnama of the petitioner has been filed, however, it is not in the stamp of the Jail Superintendent. He next submitted that the petitioner was arrested by the ACB on 07.01.2026 from Goa and was thereafter produced before the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Merces, Goa on 08.01.2026 and on that day, the petitioner preferred an application for grant of bail under the Second proviso to Section 83 read with Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. He further submitted that during the pendency of bail application, the petitioner was remanded to police custody for one day. He then submitted that the bail application of the petitioner was allowed by the learned Court at Goa on 09.01.2026, granting the petitioner interim bail for a period of four days, i.e., till 12.01.2026. He also submitted that the petitioner filed his regular bail petition before the learned Trial Court on 12.01.2026, being Misc. Criminal Application No. 78 of 2026 and the said petition was listed before the learned In-charge Judge, AJC-XIII, Ranchi, since the regular court was not available on that day, wherein, he has been pleased to reject the said bail application of the petitioner, on the ground, that the petitioner has not surrendered before the learned court physically. In these backgrounds, he submitted that the petitioner was not in the jail, in view of that vakalatnama, certified by the Jail Superintendent has not been filed.

4. The present application has been filed seeking regular bail to the petitioner, in connection with FIR, bearing ACB Case No. 09 of 2025 dated 20.05.2025 registered under Section 120-B read with Sections 420/467/468/471/409/107/109 of IPC (corresponding to Section 61(2) read with Sections 318 /336/340/316/45 and 49 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) and Section 7(c)/12, Section 13(2) read with (1)(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, (Amended in 2018), pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption Bureau, Ranchi.

5. Mr. Agarwal, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was arrested by the ACB on 07.01.2026 from Goa and was thereafter produced before the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Merces, Goa on 08.01.2026 and on that day itself, the petitioner preferred an application for grant of bail under the Second proviso of Section 83 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 with Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and during the pendency of bail application, the petitioner was remanded to police custody for one day. He next submitted that the bail application of the petitioner was allowed by the learned Court at Goa on 09.01.2026, granting the petitioner interim bail for a period of four days, i.e., till 12.01.2026. He further submitted that the petitioner filed his regular bai