1 2025:CGHC:17253 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2887 of 2025 Anjora Bai Jolhe W/o Shyam Sundar Jolhe Aged About 60 Years (Wrongly Mentioned As S/o Shyam Sundar Jolhe), R/o Village - Mauhapli, P.S. And Tahsil - Kharsiya, District - Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Kharsiya (Wrongly Mentioned As Chowki Kharsiya), District - Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 15/04/2025 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 175/2025 registered at Police Station AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 Kharsiya, District - Raigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) and 59(A) of the C.G. Excise Act. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that as per secret information received from the informant, the applicant was found to be in possession of 7 liters of Mahua liquor, thereafter, aforesaid offence has been registered against the applicant and subsequently, she was arrested. Hence, the bail application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and 7 liters of Mahua 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 also submits that the applicant has two criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, out of which, one is of the year 2012 and another is of the year 2018, the applicant is in jail since 25.03.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 5. Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and the applicant has two criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, out of which, one is of the year 2012 and another is of the year 2018. He further submits that 7 liters of Mahua liquor was recovered from the possession of the applicant, therefore, she is not entitled for grant of bail. 3 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. 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 two criminal antecedents of the years 2012 and 2018 under the Excise Act, which are old and stale, further she is in jail since 25.03.2025 and the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, further the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Let the applicant - Anjora Bai Jolhe, involved in Crime No. 175/2025 registered at Police Station Kharsiya, District - Raigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) and 59(A) of the C.G. Excise Act, be released on bail on her furnishing a 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 she 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 her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, 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 her in accordance with law. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil