1 2025:CGHC:39860 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6260 of 2025 Santosh Makarande @ Kariya S/o Devdas Makarande Aged About 52 Years R/o Signal Ghat Borkar Nagar, Patel Tiber Market, P.S. Imam Bada Nagpur, District Nagpur Maharashtra. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pushpendra K. Patel, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 08.08.2025 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 127/2025 registered at Police Station-Dongargarh District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence under Section 34(2), 59(A) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act and Section 111, 338, 336(3), 340(2) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that on 29.03.2025, acting on KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 secret information, police conducted a raid at the farmhouse of co- accused Rohit Netam @ Sonu located on a kutcha road from village Karwari to Latmarra. It was informed that large quantities of liquor from Madhya Pradesh were illegally stored there and being repacked into bottles with Chhattisgarh State labels and seals for unlawful sale. During the search, huge quantities of liquor with MP seals were recovered from two rooms and an underground cellar, including 350 cartons of Goa Special Whisky (750 ml, total 3150 bulk liters), 14 cartons of Bombay Special Whisky (750 ml, 126 Bulk liters), 48 cartons of Gulshan Desi Masala liquor in 180 ml pouches (432 Bulk liters), and 20 cartons of Bombay Special Whisky in 180 ml pouches (180 Bulk liters), totalling 3888 bulk litres. The cellar also contained empty bottles marked CSMCL, Goa Whisky stickers, sealing rolls, hologram bundles, plastic funnels, and a metal rod. The articles were seized in presence of witnesses. Initially, offence under Sections 34(1), 59-A of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act was registered against absconding accused Rohit Netam @ Sonu. During investigation, several co-accused, including Rohit Netam @ Sonu, Vishal Mishra, Daljit Singh @ Raja, Sonu Yadav, Ravi Kandra, Bhuvan Kandra, Siddharth Phule, Mohit Kurre, Omkar Garg @ Haddi, Pawan Sharma, Nandkishore @ Neetu @ Chha Katti, Tony Paswan, Manoj Tidke, Chandan Mamtani, Babulal Harod, Vikram Ahuja @ Vicky, Ganesh Narayan Bhojan, Rohidas Satardekar, Suraj Kadam, Dasharath Meena, and Santosh Devdas Makrande/appellant were arrested and remanded to judicial 3 custody. Subsequently, offences under Sections 111, 338, 336(3), 340(2)(as per chalan) of BNS were also added. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years, and the applicant has been in jail since 29.03.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays grant of bail and further in the present case, the co-accused namely Dashrath Mina, has already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No.6045 of 2025, vide order dated 01.08.2025 and the case of the applicant is similar to that co-accused and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court however, the quantity of liquor seized from the co-accused, is a very huge quantity and involvement of the present applicant in crime in question appears to be reasonable. Accordingly, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 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, 4 nature and gravity of offence levelled against the applicant and the fact that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and further considering the fact that the co- accused Dashrath Mina, has already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No.6045 of 2025, vide order dated 01.08.2025 and the case of the applicant is similar to that of co-accused who has been granted bail and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the Applicant – Santosh Makarande @ Kariya,, involved in Crime No. 127/2025 registered at Police Station-Dongargarh District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence under Section 34(2), 59(A) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act and Section 111, 338, 336(3), 340(2) of BNS, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two 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 5 cause, the trial court may proceed against him 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 him, in accordance 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 Kunal