1 2026:CGHC:10770 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9203 of 2025 Bhavesh Kumar Jangde S/o Narottam Jangde Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Aamdi Khatti, P.S. Gariyaband, District Gariyaband (C.G.) --- Applicant versus The State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House OfÏcer Excise Circle Charama, District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) --- Non-Applicant Along with MCRC No. 9903 of 2025 Dharmendra Kumar Netam S/o Jangal Singh Aged About 35 Years R/o Budelari, Police Station Kanker, District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) --- Applicant Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Excise Circle Charama, District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) --- Non-Applicant For Applicants : Ms. Pratibha Sahu, Advocate Ms. Shreya Jaiswal, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 02.03.2026 1. Since the above-mentioned two first bail applications arise out of same incident, same crime number and registered at same police RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 station, they are clubbed and heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The applicants have preferred these First Bail Applications under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 210/2025, registered at Police Station : Excise Circle Charama, District - North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) and 59(A) of the C.G. Excise Act. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the police of Police Station Excise Circle Charama, District North Bastar Kanker, (C.G.), received an information from the informant and on the basis of the said information conducted a raid and seized total 110 bulk liters of liquor from the joint possession of the present applicants. Thereafter, Police has registered an offence punishable under Sections 34(2) and 59(A) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act against the present applicants. 4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. They submit that the present applicants have no criminal antecedents. It is further submitted that under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years, the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, and the applicants are in jail since 17.10.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, they pray grant of bail to the applicants. 3 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court in the present case. He further submits that from the joint possession of the present applicants total 110 bulk liters of liquor was seized. Hence, they are not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicants and the fact that the present applicants have no criminal antecedents, further considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and they are in jail since 17.10.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicants. 8. Accordingly, the bail applications of the applicants are allowed. Let the applicants, Bhavesh Kumar Jangde and Dharmendra Kumar Netam, involved in Crime No. 210/2025, registered at Police Station : Excise Circle Charama, District - North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) and 59(A) of the C.G. Excise Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 4 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 9. 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