1 2026:CGHC:6568 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1300 of 2026 Keshav Panika @ Golu S/o Shri Lakshman Panika Aged About 25 Years R/o Ward No. 01, Near Railway Station, Loco Colony, Manendragarh, Tehsil And Police Station Manendragarh, District- Manendragarh - Chirmiri - Bharatpur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station City Kotwali District- Manendragarh Chirmiri - Bharatpur (C.G.) (Wrongly Mentioned C.G. State Through Excise Inspector, Manendragarh, District- Manendragarh - Chirmiri - Bharatpur (C.G.) ---- Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Shivam Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 05/02/2026 1. This is the ;rst bail application ;led under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 180/2025 registered at Police Station- City Kotwali, Manendragarh District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.), for the o>ence KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 23.10.2025, Assistant Sub-Inspector Chetanram Rajwade, along with other sta>, during patrolling, seized 17.250 liters of liquor and Scooty No. CG 16 CK 4133 from the main accused, Rahul Kesharwani. On the basis of the memorandum statement of the main accused, the applicant was arrested on 03.11.2025 and aforesaid o>ence was registered against him. After completion of the investigation, the ;nal report was submitted before the trial Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to enmity with the police oCcials. It is submitted that no property has been seized from the applicant. On 03.11.2025, the Investigating OCcer called the applicant to Police Station Manendragarh on the pretext of investigation and allegedly recorded a false and forged memorandum statement in Crime No. 180/2025 of P.S. Manendragarh. It is further submitted that the applicant was pressured to sign blank papers and was thereafter arrested on the same date in the said crime in order to shield the actual liquor supplier. It is also contended that the police have falsely implicated the applicant in other FIRs, namely Crime Nos. 173/2025 and 174/2025 of P.S. Manendragarh, with the same intention and copies of the said FIRs are ;led herewith as Annexure A/3. He further submits that the applicant has no direct or indirect involvement in the alleged crime and the police have failed to properly investigate the truth and merits of the case. He also 3 submits that under the Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years and in the present case, charge-sheet has been ;led before the competent Court and the applicant is in jail since 03.11.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been ;led in the present case before the competent Court and the applicant has two criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, which are still pending as such, he is a habitual o>ender. 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 fact and circumstances of the case that besides the present case, the applicant has two criminal antecedents under the Excise Act of the year 2025, which are still pending as such, he is a habitual o>ender, further he has misused the bail granted to him earlier and that the quantity of liquor seized from the possession of the co-accused namely Rahul Kesharwani i.e. 17.250 liters of liquor and on the basis of his memorandum statement, the present applicant has been made accused and also in light of the judgment rendered by the 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 4 antecedents, this Court is of the opinion that is not a ;t case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant-Keshav Panika @ Golu ;led under Section 483 of the BNSS, involved in Crime No. 180/2025 registered at Police Station- City Kotwali, Manendragarh District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.), for the o>ence 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. OCce is directed to send a certi;ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal