1 2026:CGHC:24043 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3234 of 2026 Gangoli Lal Yadav S/o Mahesh Ram Yadav Aged About 52 Years R/o Village- Kurrubhantha Ps. Bhupdeopur Distt- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Bhupdeopur District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Shreya Jaiswal, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 16.06.2026 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. 47/2026, registered at Police Station- Bhupdeopur District- Raigarh, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) and 59(a) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the police of Police Station- Bhupdeopur District- Raigarh, (C.G.), received an information from the informant and on the basis of the said information conducted a raid and seized total 07 bulk liters of RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 country made mahua liquor from the possession of the present applicant. Thereafter, Police has registered an offence punishable under Sections 34(2) and 59(a) 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 this case. She further submits that the applicant has been arrested only on the basis of doubt, the applicant has not committed any crime and neither does he ever used to sell liquor nor was he selling the mahua liquor as per the prosecution’s story on the date and place of incident. She also submits that the present applicant has three criminal antecedents out of which one case is under the Excise Act in which he has already been acquitted and other two cases are istagasha, which are disposed of, the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, and the applicant is in jail since 23.03.2026 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, she prays grant of bail to the applicant. 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. She also submits that from the possession of the present applicant total 07 bulk liters of country made mahua liquor was seized. She further submits that the applicant has four criminal antecedents, out of which, one case is under the Excise Act which is pending, which shows that the present applicant is a habitual offender. Therefore, he is not entitled 3 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 present applicant has four criminal antecedents out of which two cases are under the Excise Act in which he has already been acquitted in one case and only one case is pending and other two cases are istagasha, which are disposed of, further the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 23.03.2026 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, Gangoli Lal Yadav, involved in Crime No. 47/2026, registered at Police Station- Bhupdeopur District- Raigarh, (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 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 bail and pass orders in accordance with law. 4 (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 sufficient 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 sufficient 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. Office 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