1 2026:CGHC:25429 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5457 of 2026 1 - Toshan Kumar S/o Shri Kaushal Singh Thakur Aged About 30 Years R/o Bhawani Nagar, Kota, Raipur Gudhiyari Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Anurag Singh Rajput S/o Shri Shailendra Singh Rajput Aged About 32 Years R/o Near Chahat Medical Stores Kota, Raipur, District- Raipur , Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Bagnadi, Distt- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Sakshi Singh Thakur, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 22.06.2026 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 the applicants have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 06/2026, registered at Police Station - Bagnadi, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) & 36 of the C.G. Excise Act, 2015. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.06.23 11:27:01 +0530 2 2. As per the case of the prosecution, on 16.02.2026 the police of Police Station Baghnadi, District Rajnandgaon, were conducting vehicle checking at Baghnadi Chowk. During the checking, a Hyundai i20 car bearing registration No. CG-04-PV-8379 was stopped and searched. It is alleged that the applicants were travelling in the said vehicle and, upon search, 25 cartons of English liquor and beer of different brands, having a total quantity of 228.840 bulk litres, were seized from the vehicle. As the applicants failed to produce any valid licence or document for possession and transportation of the liquor, the police seized the liquor, vehicle and arrested the applicants. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case and have not committed any act constituting the alleged offence. It is contended that no recovery has been made from the conscious and exclusive possession of the applicants and the alleged seizure is highly doubtful, being vitiated by material procedural irregularities. The prosecution has failed to collect any cogent evidence to establish either the possession or ownership of the alleged liquor by the applicants, particularly when the seizure is stated to have been made from an open place accessible to the public. It is further submitted that the investigating agency neither properly measured the alleged liquor nor followed the prescribed procedure while preparing the seizure memo, thereby casting serious doubt on the prosecution case. Learned counsel further submits that the alleged offence is triable by the Magistrate and is not punishable with death or imprisonment for 3 life. The applicants are the sole breadwinners of their respective families, and their continued incarceration is causing severe financial hardship to their dependents. It is also submitted that the investigation has already been completed, the charge-sheet has been filed, and four prosecution witnesses examined before the trial Court have not supported the prosecution case, thereby substantially weakening the prosecution's version. In such circumstances, continued detention of the applicants is unwarranted and they deserve to be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed against the applicants and that the applicants have no criminal antecedents. 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, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicants, the fact that the applicants have no criminal antecedents, and further considering that the charge-sheet has already been filed, that the applicants have been in judicial custody since 17.02.2026, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the opinion that further detention of the applicants is not warranted. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the applicants. 7. Let applicants, Toshan Kumar & Anurag Singh Rajput involved in Crime No. 06/2026, registered at Police Station - Bagnadi, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) & 4 36 of the C.G. Excise Act, 2015, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 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. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her 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 him 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 5 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 vaibhav