1 2025:CGHC:13681 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1010 of 2025 Teerath Mehar S/o Manglu Mehar Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Patewa P.S.- Ghumka, Distt.- Rajnandgaon, C.G. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Divisional Flying Squad Distt. Durg, C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pranav Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 21.03.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.112/2024, registered at Police Station-Divisional Flying Squad, Durg District-Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, on 12.01.2025, the concerned Police have received a secret information from the KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 informant during patrolling, on the basis of said information the Police conducted raid and have seized 476 bottles of Sholay country made liquor (each containing 180 ml) totaling 85.680 bulk liters from the possession of the present applicant. Thereafter, the crime has been registered for an offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The mandatory provisions with regard to search and seizure have not been followed by the Police in this case. He also submits that the under Section 34(2) of the Chattisgarh Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years. He also submits that the applicant has 18 criminal antecedents which has been clearly explained in the bail application of para No. 4(a) and he is in jail since 12.01.2025 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 counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the quantity of liquor seized from the possession of the applicant i.e. 85.680 bulk liters of liquor. He further submits that the applicant has 18 criminal antecedents out of which 12 cases are under the Excise Act, 01 case is under the BNS Act which has been explained by the counsel for the applicant in his bail application and as such he 3 is a habitual offender. Hence, 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 fact and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence levelled against the applicant and the fact that in the present case charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the quantity of liquor seized from the possession of the applicant i.e.85.680 bulk liters of country made sholey liquor, so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, the applicant has 18 criminal antecedents out of which 12 cases are under the Excise Act, 01 case is under the BNS Act which has been clearly explained by the counsel for the applicant in the bail application and as such, it appears that the present applicant is a habitual offender, further he has misused the bail granted to him earlier, and also in light of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Court in Deepak Yadav Vs. 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 applicant – Teerath Mehar involved in Crime No.112/2024, registered at Police Station-Divisional Flying Squad, Durg District-Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under 4 Sections 34(2) 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. Office 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 0. Kunal