1 2025:CGHC:12086 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2010 of 2025 Bisambhar Yadav S/o Shri Pardeshi Yadav Aged About 52 Years R/o Barnawapara, Police Outpost- Baya, Thana- Rajadevri, Distt. Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) (Name Of Police Outpost Correctly Mentioned) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station- Rajadevri, Police Outpost- Baya, Distt. Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 11.03.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 03/2025, registered at Police Station : Rajadevri Outpost-Baya, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief is that on 07.01.2025 the police KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 of police outpost Baya received the secret information during patrolling duty with the averment that the applicant has kept country made liquor at village Barnawapara so search has been made and alleged to be seized 30 Bulk liters of country made Mahua liquor which was kept in 5 litres polythene amounting Rs. 6,000/- notice under Section 94 of BNSS to produce the license was given but he failed to produce any document therefore the applicant was arrested and after completing the investigation filed the charge- sheet. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and the said liquor was not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant. He further submits that under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years. He further submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has filed before the competent Court and the applicant is in jail since 04.01.2025 and the applicant has one criminal antecedent of the year 2022 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the applicant has one previous criminal antecedent of the year 2022 and further the quantity of liquor seized from the possession of the present applicant i.e. 30 bulk liters of country made mahua liquor as such, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the applicant has only one previous criminal antecedent which has been explained in the bail application in para No. 4(a) and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, further the quantity of liquor seized from the possession of the applicant i.e. 30 bulk liters of country made Mahua liquor and he is in jail since 07.01.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. 7. Let applicant, Bisambhar Yadav, involved in Crime No. 03/2025, registered at Police Station : Rajadevri Outpost-Baya, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through 4 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal