1 2026:CGHC:24654 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5237 of 2026 Shiv Sisodiya S/o Jahar Singh Aged About 35 Years R/o Near Durga Chowk, Siltara, Police Station- Dharsiwa, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station- Urla, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Ms. Nirupama Bajpai, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 18.06.2026 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. 152/2026, registered at Police Station : Urla District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. As per the prosecution case, on 22.04.2026, while on patrolling duty, the police officials received information from an informant that KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 the applicant was in possession of illicit liquor. Acting upon the said information, the police reached the spot, i.e., in front of Pankaj Oxygen, Urla, Raipur, where the applicant was found in illegal possession of 15.300 bulk litres of liquor. Consequently, Crime No. 152/2026 was registered against the present applicant for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, and he was arrested in connection therewith. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and the said liquor was not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant. He further submits that under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years and in the present case, charge-sheet has filed before the competent Court further the applicant has 08 criminal antecedents out of which only two cases of under the IPC are pending and rests are disposed of as the same has been explained in the bail application of para No. 4(a) and the applicant is in jail since 22.04.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, the applicant has 08 criminal antecedents out of which only two cases of under the IPC are pending and rests are disposed of as the same has been explained in the bail application of para No. 4(a). He 3 further submits that from the possession of the present applicant i.e. 15.300 bulk liters of liquor was seized and as such he is a habitual offender therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Taking into consideration the fact and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the applicant has 08 criminal antecedents out of which only two cases under the IPC are pending and rests are disposed of as the same has been explained in the bail application of para No. 4(a) and also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the quantity of liquor seized from the possession of the applicant i.e.15.300 bulk liters of liquor and he is in jail since 22.04.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 8. Let applicant, Shiv Sisodiya, involved in Crime No. 152/2026, registered at Police Station : Urla District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) 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 4 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. (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. 5 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 Kunal