1 2025:CGHC:36203 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5333 of 2025 Kailash Hiyal S/o. Shri Kamo Hiyal, Aged About 27 Years R/o. Ward No. 9, Chipiyapara Mahasamund, Ps, Tehsil And District Mahasamund (C.G.). (Kailash Niyal Wrongly Mentioned In Impugned Order). ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.). ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shubhank Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Laywer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 25.07.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 196/2025 registered at Police Station – Mahasamund District - Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act against the present applicant. 2. As per the case of prosecution in brief is that as per secret information received from the informant police was performed in the open place (near Sanjay Kanan Udyan) and total 25L 200 M.L. liquor was seized VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.07.26 11:07:38 +0530 2 from the applicant. It was also alleged that the applicant was not having the document regarding the possession of liquor. Hence the FIR was lodged. 3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated. He submits that there is no direct material evidence is collected by the prosecution against the present applicant. The case of the prosecution is completely demurred and the seizure was made from the open place and the applicant has been made accused on the basis of assumption. He further submits that the applicant is responsible member in his family to look after his family member and if he will not be released on bail, irreparable loss would be caused which could not be compensated in any terms and he is in jail since 06.05.2025, 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 the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. She further submits, applicant has 2 criminal antecedents, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, further considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the present applicant, moreover, the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 06.05.2025 and 3 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 applicant, Kailash Hiyal, involved in Crime No. 196/2025 registered at Police Station – Mahasamund District - Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act against the present applicant, against the present applicant, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 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 his 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, 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 his, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya 4 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 concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav