1 2025:CGHC:14578 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 952 of 2025 Vijay Kumar Jaiswal S/o Antram Jaiswal Aged About 35 Years R/o Village - Nawagao, Tahsil And Police Station - Kota, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Excise Circle Kota, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Amitesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sakib Ahmed, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 26.03.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 174/2025, registered at Police Station Excise Circle Kota, District – Bilaspur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(1), 34(2) and 59(A) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 2. As per the prosecution's story, in brief, on 21.01.2025, during a village tour, the Excise Circle Kota received information from an ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.03.27 11:24:11 +0530 2 informant and subsequently searched the accused's house. The search resulted in the recovery of 35 liters of Mahua liquor from the accused's possession, which included 20 liters filled in two 10-liter plastic jerry cans and 15 liters packed in 20 Nag Foil pouches, each containing 250 ml, stored in three plastic bags. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and no seizure has been made from the exclusive possession of the applicant. He further submits that the applicant is having 02 previous criminal antecedents of similar nature. He also submits that under Sections 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years and the applicant has been in jail since 21.01.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. He submits that the present applicant has 02 criminal antecedents of the similar nature, which shows that the present applicant is a habitual offender. 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. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case also 3 considering the fact that the applicant has 02 criminal antecedents of the similar nature, shows that the present applicant is a habitual offender and also in light of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, reported in (2022) 8 SCC 559, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court had cancelled the bail granted to the accused therein on the ground that the accused had previous antecedents, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, involved in Crime No. 174/2025, registered at Police Station Excise Circle Kota, District – Bilaspur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(1), 34(2) and 59(A) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, is rejected. 7. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 8. 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 Abhishek