1 2025:CGHC:61043 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8669 of 2025 Horilal S/o Shri Bhauwaram Aged About 51 Years R/o Village- Chanhat, Police Outpost- Sonakhan, P. S. Kasdol, Distt.- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station- Kasdol, Post Outpost- Sonakhan, Distt.- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 15.12.2025 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. 628/2025, registered at Police Station : Kasdol, Outpost-Sonakhan, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief is that on 11.10.2025, the ofÏcers of Kasdol, Police Outpost Sonakhan Kasdol have received KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 secrete information from the informant with the averment that the applicant has kept the country made Liquor for selling purpose, based upon such, police has made the search and alleged to be seized 50 pouches containing the country made liquor which is 09.00 Bulk liters asked the applicant to produce papers and arrested the present applicant on the basis of doubt. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, as he has no connection whatsoever with the seized liquor. It is contended that the alleged seizure was made from an open and public place where several persons were present, and there is no material on record to establish the exclusive or conscious possession of the applicant over the said liquor. The prosecution agency has failed to collect any evidence to show that either the place of occurrence or the seized liquor belonged to the applicant, and the applicant was arrested merely on suspicion. It is further submitted that no proper measurement of the liquor was conducted at the spot and, without any actual measurement, the quantity has been arbitrarily shown as 9.00 bulk litres. Moreover, the seizure memo was prepared in a mechanical manner by calling stock witnesses, thereby rendering the entire prosecution case doubtful and unreliable. He further submits that under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years and in the present case, charge-sheet has filed before the competent Court and the applicant is in jail since 11.10.2025 and the applicant has one criminal antecedent of 3 similar nature of the year 2021 as explained in the bail application of para No.4(A) and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the applicant has one previous criminal antecedent under the Excise Act of the year 2021, and is still pending and further the quantity of liquor seized from the possession of the present applicant i.e. 9.00 bulk liters of liquor as such, he is 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 applicant and the fact that the applicant has only one previous criminal antecedent of similar nature which has been explained in the bail application in para No. 4(a) and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, further the quantity of liquor seized from the possession of the applicant i.e. 9.00 bulk liters of liquor and he is in jail since 11.10.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let applicant, Horilal, involved in Crime No. 628/2025, registered at Police Station : Kasdol, Outpost-Sonakhan, District- 4 Balodabazar-Bhatapara (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 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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him 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 5 statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient 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. OfÏce 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 Kunal