1 2026:CGHC:12546 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 872 of 2026 Dayanidhi Sav S/o Fagu Lal Sav Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Aurada, Police Station Pusour, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House O.cer, Police Station Pusour, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Saxena, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 16.03.2026 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. 337/2025, registered at Police Station Pusour, District Raigarh, (C.G.) for the o=ence punishable under Sections 34(2) and 56(A) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the police of Police Station Pusour, District Raigarh, (C.G.), received an information from the informant and on the basis of the said information RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 conducted a raid and seized total 30 bulk liters of country made liquor from the possession of the present applicant. Thereafter, Police has registered an o=ence punishable under Sections 34(2) and 56(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. He further submits that under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years. He submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents. He also submits that the charge-sheet has been Bled before the competent Court, and the applicant is in jail since 20.12.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he 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 Bled before the competent Court. He also submits that from the possession of the present applicant total 30 bulk liters of country made liquor was seized. 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 facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been Bled before the competent Court and he is in 3 jail since 20.12.2025 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, Dayanidhi Sav, involved in Crime No. 337/2025, registered at Police Station Pusour, District Raigarh, (C.G.) for the o=ence punishable under Sections 34(2) and 56(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 Ble an undertaking to the e=ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates Bxed 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 Bxed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without su.cient 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 4 the date Bxed 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 Bxed 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 su.cient 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. O.ce is directed to provide a certiBed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan