1 2025:CGHC:51920 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7699 of 2025 Indrajit Kumar Kewat S/o Shri Ramkumar Aged About 32 Years R/o Ward No.5, Near Gopal Pandal Rajnagar, Bhalmundi, Tahsil Kotma, District Anuppur (M.P.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Jhagrakhand, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.) ---- Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Ramsajiwan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 17/10/2025 1. This is the Second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 79/2025 registered at Police Station, Jhagrakhand District- Manendragarh-Chirmiri(C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 6397/2025, vide order dated 13.08.2025 was rejected on merits. Hence this second bail application. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 12.06.2025, during routine patrolling, the police team of Khingapani Outpost received a tip-off that two persons were illegally transporting a large quantity of liquor from Kotma, Madhya Pradesh, in a grey Maruti Eeco car bearing registration number MP-65-C-4547. Acting on the information, the police set up a barricade near the CISF Camp, B. Seam Colliery, Khongapani, and intercepted the vehicle. Upon search, 30 cartons containing Goa whisky (each carton having 50 bottles of 180 ml each), totaling approximately 270 liters worth around Rs.1,80,000/-, were found. The accused persons, Suraj Chandel and Sujit Kumar @ Raja, failed to produce any valid documents for the transportation of the liquor. They were arrested and their memorandum statements were recorded. It is further alleged that co-accused Indrajit Kumar Kewat was involved in the illegal sale of the seized liquor without any license, and sale proceeds were recovered from his possession. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected on the ground that 270 bulk liters of english liquor from the possession of the applicant was seized, which is a huge quantity without any valid licence and no plausible explanation has been offered in that regard, therefore, the applicant has preferred this second bail application on the ground that the present applicant is working as the Manager of a Retail 3 Sale Liquor Shop, the owner of which is Veerendra Rai, and the amount recovered from the applicant represents the collection amount of the said licensed shop. This fact is evident from the copy of the license filed herewith as Annexure A-4. He further submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the applicant is in jail since 13.06.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant would oppose the bail application and submits that the bail application of co-accused, namely, Sujeet Kumar @ Raja and Suraj Chandel have already been rejected by this Court vide orders dated 18.08.2025 and 30.07.2025 in MCRC Nos.6495 of 2025 and 5960 of 2025 and the quantity of liquor seized form the possession of co- accused is 270 bulk liters, which is a huge quantity and first of the applicant was rejected on the said ground, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence levelled against the applicant and further the fact that the earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 13.08.2025 in MCRC No.6397 of 2025 on the ground that 270 bulk liters of english liquor was seized from the possession of the applicant, which is a huge quantity without any valid licence and no plausible explanation has been offered in that 4 regard, but considering the fact that the applicant is working as the Manager of a Retail Sale Liquor Shop, the owner of which is Veerendra Rai, and the amount recovered from the applicant represents the collection amount of the said licensed shop, further the liquor in question was no directly seized from the present applicant and was seized from co-accused persons, whose bail applications have already rejected by this Court vide orders dated 18.08.2025 and 30.07.2025 in MCRC Nos.6495 of 2025 and 5960 of 2025, as such, the case of the present applicant is distinguishable to that of the said co-accused persons, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 8. Let the Applicant – Indrajit Kumar Kewat, involved in Crime No. 79/2025 registered at Police Station, Jhagrakhand District- Manendragarh-Chirmiri(C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh 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. (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 him under Section 269 of 5 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. 9. 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 Kunal