1 2025:CGHC:13869 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1089 of 2025 Smt. Durga Verma W/o Ashwani Verma Aged About 31 Years (Father Wrongly Mentioned In Order of Subordinate Court) -- R/o Ghutku Mahamai Para, Thana Koni, District - Bilaspur, (C.G.). ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - Aarkshi Kendra Koni, District Bilaspur (C.G.). ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Dheerendra Pandey, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 22.03.2025 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. 31/2025, registered at Aarakshi Kendra Koni, District Bilaspur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the police of Aarakshi Kendra Koni, District Bilaspur (C.G) received a secret information and on the basis of the said information conducted a raid and seized 10 ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.03.22 16:42:17 +0530 2 liters of handmade mahua liquor from the possession of the present applicant. Thereafter, the crime has been registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and the said liquor were not seized from the possession of the applicant. 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 23.01.2025 and 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. She submits that the present applicant has 02 criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, which shows that the 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 considering the fact that the applicant has 02 criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, 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 3 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 – Smt. Durga Verma, involved in Aarakshi Kendra Koni, District Bilaspur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 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. 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