1 2025:CGHC:5337 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 240 of 2025 Narsingh @ Kejri Verma S/o Milap Verma Aged About 40 Years R/o Village- Vicharpur, Police Station Chuikhadan, District - Khairagarh- Chuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House OfÏcer, Police Station - Gandai, District-Khairagarh-Chuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29 / 01 /202 5 1. 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. 204/2024 registered at Police Station Gandai, District-Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 34(1)(b), 34(2), 35, 59(A), 49(A) of the C.G. Excise Act and Sections 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 340(2), 3(5), 111(2), 238 of BNS. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN Date: 2025.01.31 11:13:38 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 06.09.2024 the Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Gandai received information from the informant that the co-accused Mirza Varish Beg who is resident of village Narmada is keeping illegal liquor in his house and on the basis of secret information raided and found that co-accused Sukhuram Janghel and co-accused Sameer Khan are getting ready on their motorcycle having liquor and after search prosecution recovered 33 quarter (5.94 bulk liter) country made liquor (Shole Brand) from the possession of co- accused Sameer Khan and recovered motorcycle from the possession of co-accused Sukhuram Janghel and thereafter memorandum statements were recorded, they disclosed that they work under co-accused Mirza Varish Beg and on the basis of their statements 10.44 bulk liter of liquor seized from the house of co-accused Mirza Varish Beg. Thereafter memorandum statement of Mirza Varish Beg was recorded and he admitted that he purchased the alleged liquor from main accused Narsingh @ Kejri Verma. The police also found that the seized liquor have no hologram and QR code further police suspected that the seized liquors are duplicate. That, during further investigation memorandum statement of Narsingh @ Kejri was recorded and he disclosed that along with co-accused and applicant No.2 manufactures duplicate liquor in the brand name of "Shole", Narsingh further disclosed that for manufacturing duplicate liquor they purchased sprit, label slip, machine from co-accused Rohit Babar who is resident of Nagpur. Thereafter according to the memorandum statement of Narsingh the police party also visited 3 village Raunda where they found 145.8 bulk liter of duplicate liquor, 150 liter sprit, 3 packets of bottle cap, drum Jerrycan etc. Thereafter during further investigation applicant No.1 Jaikaran Gurupanch, Samim Khan, Rohit Babar were arrested. During further interrogation of applicant No.1 Jaikaran, Gurupanch disclosed that for earning money they are jointly manufacturing and selling the duplicate liquor. They further disclosed that after arranging articles for manufacturing duplicate liquor was manufactured on the poultry farm of Umesh Verma. Thereafter offence u/s 34(1)(b), 34(2), 35, 59(A), 49(A) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act and section 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 340(2), 3(5), 111(2), 238 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita 2023 registered against the applicant and other co-accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant are innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, only on the basis of memorandum statement of co-accused Vinod Soni, the present applicant has been made an accused. He further submits that as per the property seizure memo four wheeler, 4 pieces of 50 liter drum, 50 liter sprit, bottle cover and 48.600 bulk liter kept in plastic beg and the alleged articles are seized from the open place by the prosecution, further the co-accused persons, namely, Jaikaran Gurupanch and Vinod Soni, have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 27.11.2024 in MCRC No.8224 of 2024. The applicant is in jail since 07.09.2024, the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case and the trial is likely 4 to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the applicants along with other co-accused persons were indulged in a business of manufacturing and selling duplicate liquors, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 07.09.2024, the fact that though the applicant and other co- accused persons were indulged in manufacturing and selling duplicate liquor, also the applicant has 08 criminal antecedents, out of which, he has been acquitted in 06 cases, but the co-accused persons, namely, Jaikaran Gurupanch and Vinod Soni, have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 27.11.2024 in MCRC No.8224 of 2024, further the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant- Narsingh @ Kejri Verma, involved in Crime No. 204/2024 registered at Police Station Gandai, District-Khairagarh- Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 34(1)(b), 34(2), 35, 59(A), 49(A) of the C.G. Excise Act 5 and Sections 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 340(2), 3(5), 111(2), 238 of BNS, be released on bail on their 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 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 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 misuse 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 6 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 copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Rahul Dewangan