1 2025:CGHC:46358 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6285 of 2025 Amar Sen S/o Ishwari Sen Aged About 27 Years R/o Ramayan Chowk Achholi, Police Station 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 : Ms. Khushbu Sahu, Advocate. For Non-applicant : Mr. Bharat Gulbani, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10.09.2025 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. 171/2025 registered at Police Station Urla, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. As per the prosecution story, on 24.07.2025, Police Station Urla, District Raipur, received secret information from an informant during patrolling that the applicant was in possession of illegal liquor for the purpose of sale. On the basis of such information, the concerned police, along with the staff, reached near Pankaj Oxygen on the roadside, where one ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.09.11 13:17:53 +0530 2 person was found in possession of illegal liquor for sale. Thereafter, the police team surrounded him and initiated a search. During the search, the applicant was found carrying a white plastic bag containing 43 quarters of country-made masala liquor (each 180 ml), totaling 7.740 bulk liters, which was seized from his possession. Subsequently, Police Station Urla, District Raipur, registered Crime No. 171/2025 against the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and the said 7.740 bulk liters of country-made masala liquor was not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant. He further submits that the applicant has five criminal antecedents, three cases are under the IPC and two cases are under the Excise Act, out of which only one case under the Excise Act is pending, while the remaining cases have already been disposed of. He also submits that under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years and the applicant has been in jail since 24.07.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. 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 submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that the present applicant has 01 pending criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, which shows that the applicant is a habitual offender. As such, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the 3 case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and further the fact that the applicant has five criminal antecedents, three cases are under the IPC and two cases are under the Excise Act, out of which only one case under the Excise Act is pending, while the remaining cases have already been disposed of, moreover, the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the applicant has been in jail since 24.07.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the applicant – Amar Sen, involved in Crime No. 171/2025 registered at Police Station Urla, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 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 4 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 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 Abhishek