1 2025:CGHC:47789 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6510 of 2025 Padum Kumar Satranj S/o Roopchand Satranj Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Chaarpara, P.S. Malkharoda, District : Sakti, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Dabhara, District : Sakti, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Abhishek Saraf, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 17.09.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 240/2025, registered at Police Station : Dabhara District- Sakti (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 27.07.2025, SI Chandraprakash Kanwar received information from an informer that a person was selling liquor in large quantities in village Faraswani. Acting on this information, he along with his staff and witnesses KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 reached near Kahra Pond, Faraswani, cordoned off the area, and conducted a raid. During the raid, one person arrived on a black Hero Honda Splendor motorcycle bearing No. CG 13 P 8238, who was stopped and identified himself as Padam Kumar Satranj, resident of village Chaarpara, Police Station Malkharoda. On search conducted in presence of witnesses, two yellow plastic jerry cans (15 litres each) and one blue bag containing 20 litres of Mahua liquor, in total 50 litres of raw Mahua liquor worth Rs. 5000/-, were recovered along with the motorcycle used for transportation. Consequently, the applicant was arrested and FIR No. 0240/2025 was registered at P.S. Dabhara under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. He further submit that under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years and the applicant is in jail since 27.07.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 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 and the applicant has no criminal antecedent, further the quantity of liquor seized from the possession of the present applicant i.e. total 50 litres of raw Mahua 3 liquor worth Rs. 5000/- therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel 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 applicant and the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court further the quantity of liquor seized from the possession of the applicant i.e. total 50 litres of raw Mahua liquor worth Rs. 5000/- and he is in jail since 27.07.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. Let applicant, Padum Kumar Satranj, involved in Crime No. 240/2025, registered at Police Station : Dabhara District- Sakti (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, 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. 4 In case of his absence, without sufficient 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