1 2025:CGHC:37923 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6034 of 2025 1. Pradeep Sarthi S/o Dharmendra Sarthi, Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Tarkela P.S. Jutmil, Raigarh, Tahsil And District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 2. Rajkumar Sarthi S/o Ramo Sarthi, Aged About 37 Years R/o Harijan Mohalla, Kodatarai, Police Station Jutmil, Tahsil And District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Jutmil, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 01.08.2025 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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 208/2025 registered at Police Station Jutmil, District Raigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) and 59(A) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. As per the prosecution case, on 09.06.2025, during patrolling, the police officials received information from an informant that the co-accused ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.08.02 11:19:52 +0530 2 persons were transporting liquor. Acting upon the said information, the police officials reached the spot and conducted a raid, during which they recovered 580 bulk liters of country-made liquor from the illegal possession of the co-accused persons. Thereafter, the co-accused persons were arrested for the alleged offence. A copy of the F.I.R. is filed herewith as Annexure A/3. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants have been falsely implicated in this case, and the alleged country-made liquor was not seized from the possession of the applicants. He submits that the seized article was not found in the exclusive possession of the applicants, as the alleged liquor, which was kept by the co-accused for sale, was recovered from a public place. However, the present applicants were not present at the time of the raid conducted by the prosecution. He also submits that the wife of applicant No. 2 died on 16.07.2025, and her last rites and rituals will be performed by applicant No. 2, who is currently in jail. He further submits that the present applicants have no criminal antecedents under the Excise Act and have been in jail since 09.06.2025, conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable amount of time, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State, opposes the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the present applicants and the 3 fact that the present applicants have no criminal antecedents under the Excise Act. Also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and they have been in jail since 09.06.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the present applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the applicants – Pradeep Sarthi and Rajkumar Sarthi, involved in Crime No. 208/2025 registered at Police Station Jutmil, District Raigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) and 59(A) of the C.G. Excise Act, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate 4 proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them 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 Abhishek