1 2025:CGHC:3450 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 508 of 2025 Mukhdev Vishwakarma S/o Bhramdev Vishwakarma Aged About 38 Years R/o Namnakala, Ambikapur, Police Station - Gandhinagar, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station - Gandhinagar, Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Malay Shrivastava, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 20.01.2025 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. 695/2024, registered at Police Station Gandhinagar, Ambikapur District – Surguja (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the police of Police Station Gandhinagar, Ambikapur District – Surguja received a secret information and on the basis of the said information conducted a ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.01.21 16:14:43 +0530 2 raid and seized 10 liters of country liquor from the possession of the present applicant. Thereafter, the crime has been registered against 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 further submits that the applicant is having two previous criminal antecedents of similar nature of the year 2022 and 2023, which are pending trial. 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 25.11.2024 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 02 criminal antecedents of the similar nature of the 2022 and 2023, 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 diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case also considering the fact that the applicant has 02 criminal antecedents of the similar nature of the 2022 and 2023, shows that the present 3 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 – Mukhdev Vishwakarma, involved in Crime No. 695/2024, registered at Police Station Gandhinagar, Ambikapur District – Surguja (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. OfÏce 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