1 2025:CGHC:48589 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6294 of 2025 Arjun Netam S/o Bhagirathi Netam Aged About 22 Years R/o B.S.U.P. Colony, P.S. Urla District Raipur (C.G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Urla, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rekhraj Baghel, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Panel Laywer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 22.09.2025 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. 122 of 2025 registered at Police Station – Urla District - Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act against the present applicant. 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: 2025.09.23 10:23:49 +0530 2 incident, three unknown persons have kept illegal liquor in his possession to sale, and police has seized 5.760 bulk liters country made liquor from place of incident at open place Bendri over bridge 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 has been falsely implicated in the present case as he has no nexus with the incident narrated by the prosecution. No article has been seized from his possession, as the alleged illicit liquor was seized from an open place, and the police have not conducted a proper investigation. The applicant is innocent, unaware of the seized liquor, and has been in custody since 17.06.2025, being a poor person, his prolonged pre-trial detention is causing hardship to his family. Even if the seized liquor is apportioned among three persons, only a negligible quantity would remain against him, and no prima facie case is made out, nor is there any motive or intention on his part to commit the alleged offence. The allegations are false and baseless. The applicant reserves his right to raise additional grounds and submit relevant documents before this Hon’ble Court. He is a permanent resident of the village mentioned in the cause title, with no likelihood of absconding, and is ready to furnish adequate security and abide by any directions or conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicant has one criminal 3 antecedent, therefore, he is not entitled to the 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 17.06.2025 and 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, Arjun Netam, involved in Crime No.122 of 2025 registered at Police Station – Urla District - Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act 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 4 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 concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav