1 2025:CGHC:32030 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4797 of 2025 Mahendra Verma S/o Mr. Kumar Verma Aged About 26 Years (Wrongly Mentioned As Katti), R/o Village- Mohara, Tehsil - Dongargarh, P.S. Dongargarh, Distt.- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Gandai, Distt. KCG (Khairagarh Chuikhadan Gandai), C.G. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Chandradeep Prasad, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali, Mahilong, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 10.07.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 49/2025, registered at Police Station Gandai District – Khairagarh – Chuikhadan - Gandai (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that upon receiving information from an informer, the respondent police, on 09.02.2025, took ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.07.11 18:26:55 +0530 2 accused Kamlesh Kurre into custody, conducted a search, and recovered 162 bulk litres from him. Thereafter, offences under the aforesaid sections were registered against Kamlesh Kurre. Based on his memorandum, the present applicant, who had already been enlarged on bail in another offence, was implicated, arrested, and a charge sheet was filed against both the accused, including the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and no seizure has been made from the exclusive possession of the applicant. He submits that only on the basis of memorandum statement of the co-accused, the present applicant has made an accused. He also submits that under Sections 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years and the applicant has been in jail since 09.05.2025 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 State Counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. She submits that the present applicant has 06 criminal antecedents, out of which 03 cases are of the similar nature, which shows that the present applicant is a habitual offender. As such, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case 3 diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case also considering the fact that the present applicant has 06 criminal antecedents, out of which 03 cases are of the similar nature, shows that the present applicant is a habitual offender and also in light of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav v. 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 the applicant – Mahendra Verma, involved in Crime No. 49/2025, registered at Police Station Gandai District – Khairagarh – Chuikhadan - Gandai (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. 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 Abhishek