2025:CGHC:46981 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5885 of 2025 Mohan Bharti S/o Kashiram Bharti Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Nawagaon, Sector- 28, P.S. Rakhi, District Raipur C.G. ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Rakhi, District Raipur C.G. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Rekhraj Baghel, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 12.09.2025 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. 106/2025, registered at Police Station Rakhi District – Raipur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 2. as per prosecution story in brief is that the police has received information through informant during patrolling that on the date of VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.09.15 11:34:23 +0530 incident, three unknown persons have kept illegal liquor in his possession to sale, and police has seized 7.200 bulk litres foreign liquor from place of incident at open place and applicant did not produce any document of seized liquor and hence police has registered a case for offence punishable under section 34 (2) of the Excise Act against the applicant and hence this bail application is being preferred before the Hon'ble Court. 3. The applicant submits that he has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no nexus with the incident alleged by the prosecution. No article has been seized from his possession as the liquor was recovered from an open place, and the police have wrongly attributed it to him without proper investigation. The applicant is innocent, unaware of the seized illicit liquor, and has been in jail since 26.06.2025. He is a poor person, and his continued pre-trial detention is causing hardship to his family. Even if the seized liquor is divided among three persons, the quantity attributable to him would be minimal. No prima facie case or motive is made out against him, and the allegations are false and baseless, therefore, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposed the bail application and submitted that in the present case, the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. He further submitted that the present applicant has five criminal antecedents, including four cases under the Excise Act, out of which three cases are still pending, which clearly shows that the applicant is a habitual offender. Therefore, he is not entitled to the grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case also considering the fact that the applicant has five criminal antecedents, including four cases under the Excise Act, out of which three cases are still pending, which clearly shows that the 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. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Mohan Bharti, involved in Crime No. 106/2025, registered at Police Station Rakhi District – Raipur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav