Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 20499 (CHH)

JITENDRA SAHU v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/3407/2025 · 2025-05-02

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:20287 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3407 of 2025 Jitendra Sahu S/o Ramhari Sahu Aged About 33 Years R/o Kandra Para, Ward No. 7, Dhamdha, Police Station- Dhamdha, District- Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station- Dhamdha, District- Durg (C.G.) ---- Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 02.05.2025 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.10/2025, registered at Police Station- Dhamdha, District- Durg, (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, on 19.01.2025, a secret information was received by the concerned police that the applicant in his house, has kept liquor for selling purposes, resultantly the Police concern rushed to the spot and seized the said liquor from KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 the possession of applicant which is about 12.78 liters of liquor. Thereafter, the crime has been registered against the present applicant for an offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the said liquor has not recovered from the exclusive possession of the applicant and the applicant has few criminal antecedents which have already been explained in the bail application of Para No. 4(a). He also submits that under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years and the applicant is in jail since 19.01.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the applicant has 16 criminal antecedents out of which 11 cases are of the same nature and the applicant’s counsel has been explained only 07 cases in the bail application further from possession of the present applicant 12.78 bulk liters of liquor has been recovered as such, he is a habitual offender therefore, his bail application is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed before the 3 competent Court in the present case and the applicant has 16 criminal antecedents out of which 11 cases are of the same nature and the applicant’s counsel has been explained only 07 cases in the bail application which have disposed off and on bail, as such, he is a habitual offender, further he has misused the bail granted to him earlier, and that the quantity of liquor seized is 12.78 bulk liters of liquor and also in light of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Court in Deepak Yadav Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, reported in (2022) 8 SCC 559, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court had cancelled the bail granted to the accused therein on the ground that the accused had previous antecedents, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant – Jitendra Sahu involved in Crime No.10/2025, registered at Police Station- Dhamdha, District- Durg, (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, is rejected. 7. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 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