1 2026:CGHC:13173 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2603 of 2026 Pradeep Tiwari S/o Shivbaran Tiwari Aged About 42 Years R/o In Front Of R.T.O. O)ce, Derapara, Banjari Nagar, Rawanbhatha, P.S. Khamtarai, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House O)cer, P.S. Khamtarai, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rekhraj Baghel, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 19.03.2026 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. 1171/2025, registered at Police Station- Khamtarai, District- Raipur, (C.G) for the o<ence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, as per the secret information received from the informant, on the basis of such information, the police o)cials conducted raid and have seized 16.020 bulk liters of RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 country made liquor from the possession of the present applicant. Thereafter, the crime has been registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and no seizure has been made from the exclusive possession of the applicant. He further submits that the present applicant has 15 criminal antecedents, out of which only 02 cases are under the Excise Act and they are pending, and status of the rest cases has been explained. He also submits that under Sections 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years and the applicant is languishing in jail since 07.11.2025, the charge- sheet has been submitted before the competent Court, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for releasing the applicant 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 Aled before the competent Court. She also submits that the present applicant has total 15 criminal antecedents, out of which 02 cases are under the similar nature which are pending, which shows that the present applicant is a habitual o<ender. As such, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case also considering the fact that the applicant has total 15 criminal antecedents, out of which 02 cases are under the similar nature which are pending, shows that the present applicant is a habitual o<ender 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 accused therein on the ground that the accused had previous antecedents, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a At case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Pradeep Tiwari, involved in Crime No. 1171/2025, registered at Police Station- Khamtarai, District- Raipur, (C.G) for the o<ence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. O)ce is directed to send a certiAed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan