1 2025:CGHC:52999 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8612 of 2025 Piyush Kumar S/o Chandulal Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Karoundakala (Wrongly Mentioned As Karounda Tola) Post Khati, Police Station Amarkantak, District- Anuppur (M.P.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Kukdur, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Jitendra Chandrakar, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 30.10.2025 1. This is the third bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 22/2025 registered at Police Station - Kukdur, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 34(2) of Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 2. This is the third bail application. First bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 20.03.2025 passed in MCRC No. PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.10.31 10:51:18 +0530 2 1741/2025 on merit and Second bail application was rejected on 11.06.2025 passed in MCRC No. 3825/2025. 3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 08.02.2025, Inspector J.L. Shandilya of Police Station Kukdur, along with Assistant Sub- Inspector Kumar Mangalam and Constable No. 59 Dujaram, went on patrol in a government vehicle bearing registration No. CG-09 JP-9796. They alighted from the jeep at Chhuiha Tiraha and were waiting to check suspicious vehicles entering Chhattisgarh from Madhya Pradesh. At that time, a vehicle was seen descending from the hill. Upon noticing the police beacon on the jeep and the police personnel, the driver of the said vehicle reversed and attempted to go back up the hill road. On account of this suspicious behaviour, the police pursued the vehicle for approximately four kilometres and subsequently apprehended it. Upon conducting a lawful search, a total of 39 cartons containing 1,950 quarter bottles of country-made plain liquor, each of 180 ml capacity (total 351 bulk litres), were recovered from the possession of the accused, Piyush. The Police of Police Station Kukdur, District Kabirdham (C.G.), registered an FIR bearing Crime No. 22/2025 for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act and arrested the accused, Piyush. The vehicle, a Bolero bearing registration No. CG-10 P-6651, was also seized by the police. 4. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that this is the third bail application of the applicant. It is further submitted that the 3 co-accused, Tulsi Kashyap, who is similarly situated with respect to the allegations and the nature of the offence, has been enlarged on bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 9808 of 2025, vide order dated 03.09.2025 and the second bail application of the co-accused, namely, Lokhan Prasad Mahobia was allowed by this Court vide order dated 17.10.2025 passed in MCRC No. 8435/2025. The principle of parity in bail is a well-established legal position, whereby similarly placed accused persons should ordinarily be treated alike, unless there exists a material distinction justifying differential treatment. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is willing to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court while granting bail, including furnishing personal bonds, sureties, or any other conditions deemed necessary to secure his attendance during the trial. As such, the applicant is entitled to the benefit of parity with the co-accused and should be granted bail pending investigation/trial. He further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 08.02.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel admitted that the co-accused, Tulsi Kashyap, has been granted bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 9808 of 2025, vide order dated 03.09.2025 and the second bail application of the co-accused, namely, Lokhan Prasad Mahobia was allowed by this Court vide order dated 17.10.2025 passed in MCRC No. 8435/2025. 4 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. 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 previous criminal antecedents as well as the fact that the co-accused, Tulsi Kashyap, has been granted bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 9808 of 2025, vide order dated 03.09.2025 and the second bail application of the co-accused, namely, Lokhan Prasad Mahobia was allowed by this Court vide order dated 17.10.2025 passed in MCRC No. 8435/2025, as such the principle of parity in bail cannot be overlooked, the applicant is similarly situated with respect to the allegations and the nature of the offense. No material distinction has been brought to notice which would justify differential treatment in the matter of bail. The applicant has also undertaken to comply with all conditions that this Court may deem fit to impose to ensure his attendance during trial. In the said circumstance, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the third bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the applicant - Piyush Kumar, involved in Crime No. 22/2025 registered at Police Station - Kukdur, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 34(2) of Chhattisgarh Excise Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- 5 (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 BNS. (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 BNS. (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 are deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial Court to treat such default as abuse 6 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 forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti