1 2026:CGHC:6768 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1342 of 2026 Kaliram Lahre S/o Rajendra Lahre Aged About 32 Years R/o Village- Ward No.- 18, Khisora, Police Station- Baloda, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station- Baloda, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anand Kesharwani, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Saurabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 06.02.2026 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. 457/2025, registered at Police Station Baloda, District- Janjgir- Champa, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the police of Police Station Baloda, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.), received an RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 information from the informant and on the basis of the said information conducted a raid and seized total 30 bulk liters of mahua liquor from the possession of the present applicant. Thereafter, Police has registered an offence punishable under Sections Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act against the present applicant. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. 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. It is also submitted that the applicant has three criminal antecedents, out of which one case registered under the IPC has already been disposed of in acquittal, the second Istgasa proceeding has been closed, and the third case under the Excise Act has also been closed. He further submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, the applicant is in jail since 29.11.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. Hence, he prays that the applicant be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. He also submits that from the possession of the present applicant total 30 bulk liters of mahua liquor was seized. He also submits that the applicant has 03 criminal antecedents out of which one case under the Excise Act, 3 which shows that the applicant is a habitual offender, therefore, he is not entitled for 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, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the applicant has three criminal antecedents, out of which one case registered under the IPC has already been disposed of in acquittal, the second Istgasa proceeding has been closed, and the third case under the Excise Act has also been closed, further considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 29.11.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the applicant, Kaliram Lahre, involved in Crime No. 457/2025, registered at Police Station Baloda, 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 4 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 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 Rahul Dewangan