1 2026:CGHC:21672 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4318 of 2026 Raj Singh Rajput S/o Lakhan Singh Rajput Aged About 28 Years Caste - Rajput, R/o Ward No. 18, Station Para, Sakti, District Sakti Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Excise Circle - Sakti District Sakti Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Chandrikaditya Pandey, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 08.05.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 333/2025-2026, registered at Police Station Excise Circle - Sakti, District – Sakti (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 18.03.2026, the Sub- Inspector of Excise Circle, Sakti, received secret information that the present applicant, Raj Singh Rajput, was in possession of and selling illicit country-made liquor. Thereafter, he, along with his staff, reached the spot, conducted a raid, and entered the house of the present applicant, ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.05.08 19:01:42 +0530 2 where the applicant was found to be in possession of 26 plastic pouches containing 200 ml each, totaling 5.2 bulk litres of handmade country liquor (Mahua liquor), which was seized by the police. Consequently, an offence bearing Crime No. 333/2025-26 under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act was registered, and investigation was initiated. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and that no seizure has been made from his exclusive possession. He further submits that the applicant has only one criminal antecedent pending against him under the Excise Act. He also submits that under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, the minimum punishment is one year and the maximum punishment is three years. The applicant has been in jail since 18.03.2026, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable amount of time. Therefore, he prays for the applicant’s release on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. She submits that the present applicant has 02 criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, which shows that the present applicant is a habitual offender. 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 facts and circumstances of the case also considering the fact that the applicant has 02 criminal antecedents of the similar nature, shows that the present applicant is a habitual offender and also in light of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble 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 3 accused therein on the ground that the accused had previous antecedents, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Raj Singh Rajput, involved in Crime No. 333/2025-2026, registered at Police Station Excise Circle - Sakti, District – Sakti (C.G) for the offence 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. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek