1 2025:CGHC:45409 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7053 of 2025 1 - Sonu Yadav S/o Dinesh Yadav Aged About 25 Years (As Per Charge Sheet), R/o Kandrapara Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh 2 - Ravi Kandra S/o Rajendra Kandra Aged About 35 Years (As Per Charge Sheet), R/o Kandrapara Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh 3 - Bhuvan Kandra @ Raj Kandra (As Per Aadhar Card) S/o Sukhen Kandra Aged About 21 Years (As Per Charge Sheet), R/o Kandrapara Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh 4 - Siddharth Phule S/o Rupchand Phule Aged About 35 Years R/o Danteshwaripara, Ward No. 2, Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh 5 - Mohit Kurre S/o Kunwardas Kurre Aged About 22 Years (As Per Charge Sheet), R/o Kachhari Chowk, Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 For Applicant(s) : Mr. Harswardhan Singh Thakur, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 04/09/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 127/2025 registered at Police Station Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of C.G. Excise Act and Section 111, 338, 336(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’). 2. The case of the prosecution, is that on 29.03.2025, the police received credible information that a large quantity of illegal liquor had been stored at the farmhouse of Rohit Netam @ Sonu, located on the Kutcha road between Village Karwari and Latmarra. It was further informed that the liquor had been transported from Madhya Pradesh and was intended to be bottled and sold with counterfeit seals of Chhattisgarh. Acting upon this information, the police conducted a raid at the said farmhouse, where a substantial quantity of liquor, approximately 3,888 bulk liters—was seized along with several empty bottles. Although the bottles did not have stickers or corks affixed, the seals indicated inter-state transport, intended for sale in Chhattisgarh. A Dehati Nalisi was lodged against Rohit Netam @ Sonu, and during the course of investigation, other accused persons were taken into 3 custody. After completing the investigation, the police filed a charge sheet, concluding that the offence as alleged had been committed. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that no incriminating article has been seized from the exclusive possession of the present applicants, and the charge sheet does not reflect recovery of any such item from them. The main accused, from whose farmhouse the illicit liquor was allegedly recovered, has not been arrested, and the applicants have been falsely implicated solely on the basis of memorandum statements. Furthermore, the co-accused have wrongly named the applicants, and without proper interrogation or seizure of any material evidence from them, the applicants have been arrested. He also submits that 11 co-accused persons have already been granted regular bail by this Court and the case of present applicant is identical to that of the said 11 co-accused persons, so far as criminal antecedents of the applicants under the Excise Act are concerned, applicant No.1 has one criminal antecedent under the Excise Act, applicant No.2 has three criminal antecedent under the Excise Act, applicant No.3 has no criminal antecedent, applicant No.4 has three criminal antecedent under the Excise Act and applicant No.5 has two criminal antecedent under the Excise Act The applicants are in jail since 03.04.2025 and trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail 4 to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed. He further submits that the 11 co-accused, who were granted regular bail by this Court have been granted bail on the ground that they have no criminal antecedent, whereas present applicants are concerned, applicant No.1 has two criminal antecedents under the, out of which one is under the Excise Act and one is under the IPC, applicant No.2 has four criminal antecedent, out of which, one is under the Gambling Act and three are under the Excise Act, applicant No.3 has no criminal antecedent, applicant No.4 has three criminal antecedents under the Excise Act and applicant No.5 has two criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, therefore, they are not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation levelled against the applicants and the fact that applicants are alleged to be involved in a case related to the illegal transportation, storage, and intended sale of illicit liquor, further considering the fact that the learned counsel for the applicant submits that 11 identically situated co-accused persons have already been bail by this Court, but the said 11 co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Court on the ground that they have no criminal antecedent, whereas present applicants are 5 concerned, applicant No.2 has three criminal antecedent under the Excise Act, applicant No.4 has three criminal antecedent under the Excise Act and applicant No.5 has two criminal antecedent under the Excise Act, which shows that they are habitual offender, thus, this Court is of the opinion that is not a fit case to grant regular bail to the applicant Nos. 2, 4 and 5. 7. Accordingly, this bail application of applicant Nos.2, 4 and 5, namely, Ravi Kandra, Siddharth Phule and Mohit Kurre, respectively involved in Crime No. 127/2025 registered at Police Station Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of C.G. Excise Act and Section 111, 338, 336(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, is rejected at this stage. 8. Whereas applicant Nos.1 and 3 are concerned, applicant No.1 has only one criminal antecedent under the Excise Act, applicant No.3 has no criminal antecedent, further charge-sheet has been filed in the present case and they are in jail since 03.04.2025, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time, hence, this Court is of the view that the applicant Nos.1 and 3 is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 9. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant Nos.1 and 3 is allowed. 10. Let applicant Nos. 1 and 3, namely, Sonu Yadav and Bhuvan Kandra @ Raj Kandra, respectively involved in Crime No. 127/2025 registered at Police Station Dongargarh, District 6 Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of C.G. Excise Act and Section 111, 338, 336(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, be released on bail on their 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 misuses 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 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 7 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. 11. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil