1 2026:CGHC:21026 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3205 of 2026 Brijmohan Keshkar S/o Laxman Keshkar Aged About 45 Years R/o 241, Schoolpara, Pachri, Thana And Tahsil Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (CG) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through-District Magistrate Janjgir, Thana- Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa (CG) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 05.05.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 50/2026, registered at Police Station Akaltara, District – Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 23.01.2026, acting upon secret information received from an informant, the police conducted a search in front of the shop of the applicant and seized 30 litres of handmade liquor from the possession of the applicant. Thereafter, the police arrested the applicant on 23.01.2026. ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.05.06 18:43:56 +0530 2 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the applicant has three criminal antecedents, out of which two cases are registered under the NDPS Act and one case is under the IPC, all of which are pending trial. An explanation in this regard has already been provided in paragraph No. 4(a) of the present bail application. He further submits that under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, the minimum punishment prescribed is one year and the maximum punishment is three years. The applicant has been in custody since 23.01.2026, and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that, looking to the criminal antecedents of the applicant under the Excise Act, the applicant appears to be a habitual offender. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to the grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case-diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and further considering that the applicant has three criminal antecedents, out of which two cases are registered under the NDPS Act and one case is under the IPC, all of which are pending trial, for which an explanation has already been provided in paragraph No. 4(a) of the present bail application, and also considering that the charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicant has been in custody since 23.01.2026, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. Let applicant, Brijmohan Keshkar, involved in Crime No. 50/2026, 3 registered at Police Station Akaltara, District – Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without 4 sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. OfÏce 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 Abhishek