1 2026:CGHC:19637 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3829 of 2026 Dharmendra @ Sonu Sariwan S/o Lakhanlal Sariwan Aged About 42 Years R/o Village And Post- Gopalpur, P.S. Karanjiya, Tahsil Bajag, District Dindori (M.P.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through (Police Station) Office Of Sub Inspector Excise Circle Kukdur District Kabirdham C.G. ...Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Bhuvneshwar Singh Rajput, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 28.04.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this Second 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.22/2025, registered at Police Station : Kukdur District Kabirdham (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant has been rejected on merits by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 13.01.2026 passed in MCRC VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.04.28 16:29:52 +0530 2 No. 424 of 2026. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that as reflected in the bail rejection order, is that on 08.02.2025, Inspector J.L. Shandilya of Police Station Kukdur, along with Assistant Sub-Inspector Kumar Mangalam and Constable No. 59 Dujram, proceeded on night patrol in a government vehicle bearing registration No. CG-09 JP 9796 to check criminal activities in the area. While stationed at Chhuiha Tiraha to intercept suspicious vehicles entering Chhattisgarh from Madhya Pradesh, they noticed a vehicle descending from the hill. On noticing the police presence and beacon, the driver of the said vehicle attempted to flee by reversing uphill, which aroused suspicion. The police chased the vehicle for about 4 kilometers and successfully intercepted it. Upon search, 1950 quarter bottles of country liquor (180 ml each), packed in 39 cartons totaling 351 bulk liters, along with a Bolero vehicle bearing registration No. CG 10-P-6651, were seized and taken into custody. The accused persons, namely Piyush, Tulsi Kashyap, and the vehicle owner Lokhan Prasad Mahobiya, were arrested and produced before the remand Court. As the present applicant/accused Dharmendra @ Sonu had absconded, permission was obtained to continue the investigation under the relevant provisions, and a charge-sheet was filed against the arrested accused persons. During the course of investigation, the present applicant was subsequently arrested on 18.11.2025 and produced before the competent Court. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present application is the second bail application. He further submits that no liquor has been seized from his exclusive possession, nor is he involved in any 3 manner in tampering with holograms or caps of the liquor bottles. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence, and there is no material connecting him with the crime. The final report (charge-sheet) has already been filed, and key prosecution witnesses (PW-1 to PW-4) have been examined and cross-examined before the Trial Court, whose depositions do not support the prosecution case, thereby indicating false implication of the applicant. Furthermore, the co- accused, namely Tulsi Kashyap, has been granted bail by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 9808 of 2025 vide order dated 03.09.2025, and the co-accused Lokhan Prasad Mahobiya and Piyush Kumar have also been enlarged on bail by this Hon’ble Court vide orders dated 17.10.2025 and 30.10.2025 passed in MCRC No. 8435/2025 and MCRC No. 8612/2025, respectively; thus, on the well-established principle of parity, the present applicant, being similarly situated, is also entitled to be released on bail. The applicant undertakes to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court, including furnishing personal bonds and sureties, and there is no likelihood of his absconding or interfering with the trial; hence, he deserves to be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that applicant is resident of the State of Madhya Pradesh and there are six previous criminal antecedent bearing crime No.586 of 2004 registered at police station Forest Department Thana for offence under Sections 26(1) D, C, Ch of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, in crime No.242 of 2020 registered at police station Forest Department Thana for offence under Sections 26(1) e,f of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, in crime No.361 of 2020 registered at police station 4 Forest Department Thana for offence under Sections 26(1) E, F of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, in crime No.228 of 2021 registered at Police Station Karanjiya for offence under Section 3, 181, 5, 5, 180 of the MV Act, 1988, in crime No. 943 of 2021 registered at police station Forest Department Thana for offence under Sections 2(b), 2(c), 3(1), 7, 55(1), 56, 58, 59 and 61 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and in one RCT No.135 of 2022 registered at police station Forest Department Thana for offence under Sections 2, 26(1) e,f,g, 42, 52 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and offence under Section 2, 3, 5 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, and all cases are pending for their conclusion, it appears that applicant is a habitual offender and also he misused the liberty granted him earlier. Hence, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, and the fact that this is the second bail application the earlier application having been rejected on merits by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 13.01.2026 passed in MCRC No. 424 of 2026 and further considering that the applicant has six previous criminal antecedents, that no new ground has been raised, and the seriousness of the allegations against the present applicant, this Court is of the considered opinion that the second bail application of the applicant deserves to be rejected. 8. Accordingly, the Second bail application of the applicant – Dharmendra @ Sonu Sariwan, involved in Crime No.22/2025, 5 registered at Police Station : Kukdur District Kabirdham (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, is rejected. 9. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 10. Office 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 vaibhav