1 2025:CGHC:50343 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7987 of 2025 Ranjan Singh S/o Late Ramnath Kumeti Aged About 59 Years R/o Village Madhiyakatta, P.S. And Tahsil Doundi Distt. Balod Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Police Station Doundi Distt. Balod Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vipin Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 09.10.2025 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. 60/2025, registered at Police Station : Doundi, District – Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. The prosecution story as portrayed in brief is that on 24.05.2025 the police station Doundi have received the secrete information that the present applicant has kept handmade Kachchi Mahua liquor in his VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.10.09 18:03:05 +0530 2 backyard of his house, the police has done raid and seized 11 bulk letter of handmade Kachchi Mahua liquor from the backyard of the present applicant in a 10 litter capacity of jaar total valued of Rs. 1400/- and also the police has seized Rs. 200/- Cash from the present applicant. the police has registered crime no 60/2025 offences under section 34(2) of Excise Act and arrested the present applicant on 24.05 2025. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that the alleged kachchi mahua liquor was seized by the police from an open space located in the backyard of the applicant’s house and not from his exclusive possession. The applicant is an elderly man aged about 59 years and has been in judicial custody since 24.05.2025. His continued pre-trial detention is unjustified, a fact not duly considered by the learned Court below. The offences alleged against the applicant are triable by the Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, which was also overlooked by the lower Court. As per the prosecution’s own version, the applicant was neither present at the time of the alleged incident nor was any liquor recovered from his possession, yet the Learned Sessions Court committed a legal error in dismissing his bail application. He further submits that the applicant has five criminal antecedents, but he has been acquitted in four of those cases. The incident occurred on 24.05.2025, and the applicant was arrested on the same day. Therefore, considering the above facts and that he has no serious criminal record, learned counsel prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicant. 3 4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and does not endorse the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant. He submits that the applicant has five criminal antecedents and that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. He further submits that 11 bulk liters of country-made liquor were seized from the possession of the present applicant, therefore, he is not entitled to be granted bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, further considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the present applicants moreover, the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and applicants are in jail since 24.05.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Ranjan Singh, involved in Crime No. 60/2025, registered at Police Station : Doundi, District – Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 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. 4 (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 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Vaibhav