1 2026:CGHC:6774 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1252 of 2026 Sandeep Soni S/o Shiv Prasad Aged About 23 Years R/o Shanti Nagar, Kumhari District Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Police Station Patan District Durg C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar Singh, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 06/02/2026 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 37/2025 registered at Police Station Patan District Durg 2 (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2), 36 of the C.G. Excise Act and Section 61(2) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 08.02.2025, as per secret information received from the informant, the Police of concerned Police Station seized 4500 bulk liters of illegal liquor from the vehicle in which applicant along with co-accused persons were traveling carrying the same, which led to the registration of alleged offence against the applicant and subsequently, the applicant was arrested. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 09.05.2025 in MCRC No.3646/2025, therefore this second bail application is filed on the ground that two of the identically situated co-accused persons, namely, Kamal Kishore and Tulesh Sahu have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 15.04.2025 and 28.04.2025 in MCRC Nos.1668/2025 and 3216/2025, further the applicant is in jail since 08.02.2025, hence, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that though the applicant has no criminal antecedent, but large quantity of liquor (4500 bulk liters) has been recovered from the vehicle, which was driven by the present applicant, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for 3 grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. From perusal of the records, it transpires that this is the second bail application of the applicant and first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 09.05.2025 in MCRC No. 3646 of 2025 on the ground that applicant that the large quantity of liquor (4500 bulk liters) has been recovered from the vehicle, which was driven by the present applicant, but considering the fact that the applicant is in judicial custody since 08.02.2025 and two of the co-accused persons, namely, Kamal Kishore and Tulesh Sahu have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 15.04.2025 and 28.04.2025 in MCRC Nos.1668/2025 and 3216/2025, also considering the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Sandeep Soni, involved in Crime No. 37/2025 registered at Police Station Patan District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2), 36 of the C.G. Excise Act and Section 61(2) of BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following 4 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 sufficient 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 sufficient 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. 9. However, this Court hope and trust that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial within a period of six 5 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil