1 2025:CGHC:37710 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5097 of 2025 • Tej Pratap Yadav S/o Late Nohar Sai Yadav Aged About 45 Years Occupation Labourer, R/o Mangal Pandey Ward No. 13, Namnakala, Police Station And Tehsil Ambikapur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh) ... Applicant versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer- Flying Squad Surguja Division, Ambikapur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Syed Mohmmad Sohail Afzal, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 31/07/2025 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. 61/2025 registered at Police Station-Office of Assistant District- Excise Officer, Surguja Division, District Sarguja (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 34(1)(A), 34(2) and 59(a) of the C.G. Excise Act. VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.08.04 10:58:52 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on June 7, 2025, acting on credible information, the Surguja Divisional Flying Squad of the Excise Department conducted a raid in Bargahpara, Namnakala, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh, and apprehended Tej Pratap Yadav, a 45-year-old labourer, for illegally possessing and selling 30 liters of hand-brewed Mahua liquor, stored in six white containers of 5 liters each, in violation of Sections 34(1)(a), 34(2), and 59(a) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. The seizure was documented, and the Applicant was arrested on the spot, with the prosecution alleging that he was actively engaged in the illicit sale of liquor from his premises, supported by the recovery of the substantial quantity of liquor as evidence. The case was registered as Crime No. 61/2025. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and 30 liters of hand-brewed Mahua 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 also submits that applicant has not criminal antecedent. The applicant is in jail since 07.06.2025 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. Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and the applicant has one criminal antecedent. He further submits that 30 liters of hand- brewed Mahua liquor, was recovered from the possession of the applicant, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 3 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 allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the applicant has one criminal antecedents, he is in jail since 07.06.2025 and the charge-sheet has been filed, further the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the applicant –Tej Pratap Yadav, involved in Crime No. 61/2025 registered at Police Station-Office of Assistant District- Excise Officer, Surguja Division, District Sarguja (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 34(1)(A), 34(2) and 59(a) of the C.G. Excise Act, 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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, 4 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 Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient 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. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali