1 2026:CGHC:13011 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1694 of 2026 Karna Sharma @ Babu S/o Late Brijmohan Sharma, Aged About 38 Years R/o House No. 156, Khatapur Muhalla, Ward No. 03 Thaneshar, P.S. Krishnagate, District Kurukshetra, (Haryana). ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House O6cer, P.S. Jashpur, District Jashpur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Arun Kumar Shukla, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 18.03.2026 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. 201/2025, registered at Police Station Jashpur, District – Jashpur (C.G) for the o>ence punishable under Section 34(1)(a), 34(2) and 42 of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 2. As per the brief facts of the prosecution case, the police of Police Station Jashpur, on the basis of secret information, seized 6588.72 litres of English wine from a truck and registered the aforesaid case under the CG Excise Act against the applicant, and arrested him. ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.03.19 15:04:01 +0530 2 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 present applicant has no criminal antecedents. 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 has been in jail since 24.11.2025 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, the charge-sheet has been Dled before the competent Court. He further submits that the present applicant has two criminal antecedents one case is under the Excise Act and another case is under the BNS, which shows that the applicant is a habitual o>ender. As such, he is not entitled to the 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 two criminal antecedents, one case is under the Excise Act and another case is under the BNS, 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 Dt case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Karna Sharma @ Babu, involved in Crime No. 201/2025, registered at Police 3 Station Jashpur, District – Jashpur (C.G) for the o>ence punishable under Section 34(1)(a), 34(2) and 42 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. O6ce is directed to send a certiDed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek