1 2025:CGHC:23578 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4382 of 2025 Dharmendra Jaiswal S/o Rupnarayan Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Tilkeja, Tahsil And District Korba Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Excise Circle Korba (South), District Korba Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Mirza Kaisher Beg, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 12.06.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.08/2025, registered at Police Station Excise Circle Korba (South) District- Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(1) (क), 34(2) and 59 (क) of C.G. Excise Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that as per secret information received from the informant, on the basis of said information the Police conducted raid and have seized total 18 bulk liters of handmade Mahua liquor from the illegal possession of the present applicant. Thereafter, the crime has been registered for an offence KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 punishable under Sections 34(1) (क), 34(2) and 59 (क) of C.G. Excise Act. 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. He further submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has filed before the competent Court and the applicant is in jail since 17.04.2025 and the applicant has two criminal antecedents of a similar nature of the year 2022 and 2024 which are still pending as explained in the bail application of para No. 4(A) 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, 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 quantity of liquor seized from the possession of the applicant i.e.18 bulk liters of hand made mahua liquor. He further submits that the applicant has two criminal antecedents of a similar nature of the year 2022 and 2024 which are still pending as explained in the bail application of para No. 4(A) and as such he is a habitual offender. Hence, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, nature and 3 gravity of offence levelled against the applicant and the fact that in the present case charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the quantity of liquor seized from the possession of the applicant i.e. 18 bulk liters of hand made Mahua liquor, so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, the applicant has two criminal antecedents of a similar nature of the year 2022 and 2024 which are still pending as explained in the bail application of para No. 4(A) and as such, it appears that the present applicant is a habitual offender, further he has misused the bail granted to him earlier, 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 – Dharmendra Jaiswal involved in Crime No.08/2025, registered at Police Station Excise Circle Korba (South) District-Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(1) (क), 34(2) and 59 (क) of C.G. Excise Act, is rejected. 7. 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 Kunal