The decision in Newcastle Local Court came ahead of a landmark NSW Supreme Court judgement on Friday that will decide the fate of five high-ranking Nomads.

Police are seeking to severely restrict the movements of members Bradley Bowtell, Dylan Britliffe, Blake Kevin Martin, James Kenneth Quinnell and Kane Benjamin Tamplin by imposing serious crime prevention orders.

The move is a state-first.

If the Supreme Court decides in favour of police, those members would face severe restrictions on their movements, including a ban on attending pubs and clubs and travelling in a vehicle outside the hours of 9pm and 6am. The legislation has been criticised as “draconian” but police argue its use is necessary to curtail the dangerous Hunter bikie conflict.

On Thursday, two alleged members of the Nomads, charged after a series of raids on April 5, were partly successful in an application to relax bail conditions.

Matthew John Milliner and John Christian Kirby both had a $10,000 surety removed, they no longer need to report to police each day and curfew checks were limited to three times a week.

Three others – Murray Patrick Britliffe, Kaddison David O’Shea and Bradley John Frazer – withdrew their bail variation applications as Magistrate Robert Stone outlined reasons why he was keeping curfew conditions.

It came after more than two hours of argument where barrister Nic Moir led the charge for the five men.

Mr Moir argued there was “not one scintilla of evidence” to suggest the men had been involved in the violence. He said police bail conditions “restricted movement unnecessarily”.

“An ordinary citizen would be expected to go about their business … without being prohibited,” he said.

“The question is why does that assist in alleviating concerns?”

Police bail conditions imposed on the men after their arrest earlier this month included the $10,000 surety, observing a curfew between 9pm and 5am, not having more than one phone, not possessing an encrypted device and taking the most direct route to work.

Mr Stone said while the safety of the public was a “priority” he needed to “balance people’s rights and freedoms”. He said an allegation the men were members of the Nomads was an “assertion” only.

“Just because a police officer says they are members doesn’t make it so,” Mr Stone said.

A DPP solicitor said since the raids there had been 21 days of no violence between Finks and Nomads – the longest stretch this year.

Police evidence of an itemised list of Nomads colours seized from the men’s homes was tendered to the court.

However, Mr Stone said based on the evidence before him the “highest inference” he could draw was that they were associated with the group, not that they had knowingly participated in it.

The matters were adjourned to June 7.