1 2025:CGHC:21703 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3646 of 2025 Sandeep Soni S/o Shiv Prasad Aged About 23 Years R/o Shanti Nagar, Kumhari, District Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The S H O Patan, District Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Shalvik Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 09.05.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the BNSS in connection with Crime No.37/2025, registered at Police Station Patan, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2), 36 of the C.G. Excise Act and Section 61(2) of the BNS. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, on 08.02.2025, on receiving a secret information that some unknown persons are transporting illegal liquor in vehicle bearing Registration No. MP 46 H 0513 AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 and when police reached near village Funda, the above vehicle entered into one farm house and police recovered 4500 bulk litres of illegal liquor and registered the case. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the case. Their no seizure of liquor from the present applicant. And further the applicant does not know the main accused in this case, the Main accused Azam picked the applicant on the way at Kumhari to show him the direction to Farm House of Bhikham Verma, the applicant was not aware that illegal liquor was kept in the vehicle in which he has been asked to sit. Also, co-accused namely Kamal Kishore and Tulesh Sahu have already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC 3216/2025 and MCRC No. 1668/2025 and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused persons. Further, co-accused Hemant Rai Yadav and Vashudev have also been granted bail by the learned trial Court on 23/04/2025. Lastly, the applicant is languishing in jail since 08.02.2025 and though the charge-sheet has been filed, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, hence he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that so far as other co-accused persons who have been released on bail are concerned, neither they were present in the vehicle from which liquor has been seized nor any seizure was made from them. But, the present 3 applicant was present in the vehicle at the time of the incident fro which the liquor was seized and further, the co-accused who was present with the applicant at the time of incident and was driving the vehicle in question, is still languishing in jail. Hence the case of the present applicant is distinguishable from that of the co- accused persons who have been granted bail by this Court, as such, the bail application of the present applicant is liable to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, it appears that the present applicant was present in the vehicle at the time of the incident and 4500 bulk litres of liquor has been seized from the possession of the applicant, further so far as co-accused persons who have been granted bail are concerned, neither they were present in the vehicle from which liquor has been seized nor any seizure was made from them, as such, though the charge-sheet has been filed and applicant is languishing in jail since 08.02.2025, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Therefore, the bail application filed by the applicant/accused – Sandeep Soni involved in Crime No.37/2025, registered at Police Station Patan, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2), 36 of the C.G. Excise Act and Section 61(2) of the BNS, is rejected at this stage. 4 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned, is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil