1 2025:CGHC:22629 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3398 of 2025 Chudamani Urf Mani Verma S/o Kunjram Verma Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Surajpura, P.S. Bhatapara (Gramin), District Balodabazar- Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Bhatarapa (Gramin), District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Ashish Gangwani, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 09.06.2025 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. 212/2025, registered at Police Station : Bhatapara (Gramin), 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 the Police of Police Bhatapara (Gramin), District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.), KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 received a information from the informant and on the basis of the said information conducted raid and have seized 9 bulk liters of Desi liquor from the possession of the applicant. Thereafter, Police has registered an offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act against the present applicant. 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 and in the present case, charge-sheet has filed before the competent Court further the applicant has five criminal antecedents which has been explained in the bail application of para No. 4(a) and the applicant is in jail since 29.03.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 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 five previous criminal antecedents, out of which two cases are under the Excise Act and three cases are under the IPC. She further submits that from the possession of the present applicant 9 bulk liters of Desi liquor was seized and as such he is a habitual offender therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 3 6. Taking into consideration the fact and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the applicant has five criminal antecedents, out of which two cases are under the Excise Act, (in one case, the applicant has acquitted and another case has disposed off by imposing fine amount) and three cases are under the IPC, which are still pending and also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the quantity of liquor seized from the possession of the applicant i.e. 9 bulk liters of Desi liquor and he is in jail since 29.03.2025 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, Chudamani Urf Mani Verma, involved in Crime No. 212/2025, registered at Police Station : Bhatapara (Gramin), 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 sufficient 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 sufficient 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. Office 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