1 2025:CGHC:29918 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5116 of 2025 Manoj Kumar Satnami S/o Ramhaiya Lal Satanami Aged About 36 Years Caste Satnami, R/o Village Sonthi, Police Station And Tahsil Sakti, District Sakti (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Excise Circle Sakti, District Sakti (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 02.07.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 45/2025-26, registered at Police Station : Excise Circle Sakti, District Sakti (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the police of Police Station : Excise Circle Sakti, District Sakti (C.G.), received an RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 information from the informant and on the basis of the said information conducted a raid and seized total 10.6 bulk liters of country made mahua liquor from the possession of the present applicant. Thereafter, Police has registered an offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act against the present applicant. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the present applicant has 01 criminal antecedent under the Excise Act, in which he is on bail. He further submits that under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years, and the applicant is in jail since 11.05.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. He also submits that the present applicant has 01 criminal antecedent under the similar nature which shows that the present applicant is habitual offender. He further submits that from the possession of the present applicant total 10.6 bulk liters of country made mahua liquor was seized, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 3 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 present applicant has 01 criminal antecedent under the Excise Act, in which he is on bail and further considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 11.05.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. Let the applicant, Manoj Kumar Satnami, involved in Crime No. 45/2025-26, registered at Police Station : Excise Circle Sakti, District Sakti (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, be released on bail on furnishing 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 4 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 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan