1 2026:CGHC:24365 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4812 of 2026 Raju Pardhi S/o Jhadiram Pardhi Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Khursidih Chowki Nagpura, Tehsil And District Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S H O Police Station Pulgaon, District Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, P.L. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 17/06/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 77/2026 registered at Police Station 2 Pulgaon, District Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) & 49(A)(1) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 19.01.2026, the Police of Police Station Pulgaon, District Durg (C.G.) has received secret information by the informant and conducted a raid in which the applicant was found possessing 23.940 bulk liters of country made liquor and accordingly, the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act was registered against the applicant. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The mandatory provisions with regard to search and seizure have not been followed by the Police in this case. He also submits that under Section 34(2) of the Chattisgarh Excise Act, the minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years. He also submits that the applicant has five criminal antecedents, out of which, three cases are under the IPC and two cases are under the Excise Act, in case under the Excise Act of the year 2021 and in case under the IPC of the year 2021, the applicant has already been acquitted and rest of the three cases are pending. The applicant is in jail since 19.01.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 3 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that the applicant is having five criminal antecedents, out of which, two are under the Excise Act and three cases are under the IPC, as such, he is a habitual offender and is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and in the present case the applicant is having five criminal antecedents, out of which, three are under the IPC and two are under the Excise Act, though in one case under the Excise, the applicant has already been acquitted, but considering the fact that the applicant is a habitual offender and has misused the liberty of bail granted to him earlier, also in light of the judgment rendered by the 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 is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant-Raju Pardhi, involved in Crime No. 77/2026 registered at Police Station 4 Pulgaon, District Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) & 49(A)(1) 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. Office 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 Akhil