1 2025:CGHC:5618 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 828 of 2025 1 - Leeladhar Chakradhari @ Golu S/o Bitani Chakradhari Aged About 19 Years R/o Gurunanak Ward Panchshil Nagar, Bhatapara, P.S. Bhatapara City, District Blodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) (As Per Chalaan) 2 - Khilawan Gendre S/o Dujeram Gendle Aged About 23 Years R/o Atal Ward Gurunanak Ward, Bhatapara, P.S. Bhatapara City, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) (As Per Chalaan) ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer P.S. Bhatapara City, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ramsajiwan, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Subha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 30.01.2025 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 have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 486/2024, registered at Police Station : Bhatapara city, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, Section 112(2) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and Section 25 of Arms Act. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN Date: 2025.01.31 11:14:20 +0530 2 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the police of Police Station : Bhatapara city, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, (C.G.), received an information from the informant and on the basis of the said information conducted a raid and seized 37.26 bulk liters of illicit country made liquor from the joint possession of the present applicants. Thereafter, Police has registered an offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, Section 112(2) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and Section 25 of Arms Act. against the present applicants. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicant is falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the present applicants have no criminal antecedents. He further 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 27.10.2024 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. She further submits that from the possession of the present applicants 37.26 bulk liters of illicit country made liquor was seized, therefore, they are not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 3 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicants and the fact that the present applicants have no criminal antecedents and further considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed and they are in jail since 27.01.2024 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, Leeladhar Chakradhari @ Golu and Khilawan Gendre, involved in Crime No. 486/2024, registered at Police Station : Bhatapara city, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, Section 112(2) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and Section 25 of Arms 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 file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (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 fixed 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 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 8. OfÏce 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 Rahul Dewangan