1 2025:CGHC:56767 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9437 of 2025 1 - Rohan Barik S/o Shri Jahar Lal Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Chandan, Police Station Rajadevri, District-Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.) 2 - Balmiki Kumhariya S/o Shri Pramod Kumhariya Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Chandan, Police Station Rajadevri, District- Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Applicants versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Rajadevri, District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Non-Applicants For Applicants : Mr. Sumit Shrivastava, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 21.11.2025 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 72/2025, registered at Police Station Rajadevri, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the o2ence punishable under ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.11.21 17:06:48 +0530 2 Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 6.9.2025 the Police of Police Station -Rajadevri District Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.) have received a secret information from the informant at the time of patrolling that the applicants were transporting the liquor, so the police made a search and alleged to be seized 55 bulk liters of country-made liquor, which was kept in plastic bags and arrested the applicants on the basis of doubt and after completing the investigation 8led the charge-sheet. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that applicant No.1-Rohan Barik has one criminal antecedent of the year 2025 under the Excise Act, however, applicant No.2 has no criminal antecedents. He also submits that under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years, and the applicants are in jail since 6.9.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicants. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and also endorse the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicant No.1 has one criminal antecedent of the year 2025 under the Excise Act, however, applicant No.2 has no criminal antecedents and submits that the charge-sheet has already been 8led before the competent Court. He also submits that from the joint possession of the present 3 applicants, 55 bulk liters of country-made liquor were seized, therefore, they are 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 applicants and the fact that applicant No.1 has one criminal antecedent of the year 2025 under the Excise Act, however, applicant No.2 has no criminal antecedents and also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been 8led and they are in jail since 6.9.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicants. 7. Let applicants, Rohan Barik and Balmiki Kumhariya, involved in Crime No. 72/2025, registered at Police Station Rajadevri, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the o2ence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, be released on bail on furnishing 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 8le an undertaking to the e2ect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 8xed 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 4 court on each date 8xed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without su?cient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse 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 8xed 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 8xed 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 applicants are deliberate or without su?cient 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. 8. O?ce is directed to provide a certi8ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek