1 2026:CGHC:119 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9411 of 2025 Chandrasekhar Baghel S/o Ramelal Baghel Aged About 24 Years R/o - Ward No. 04, Bhawani Chowk, Village - Sontara, Police Station - Kharora, Tahsil - Tilda, District - Raipur (C.G.) (As Per Correct Details) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Of Police Station - Excise Sub Inspector Circle, Kharora, District - Raipur (C.G.) ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sachin Nidhi, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Dy. A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 02.01.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 128/2025, registered at Police Station – Excise Sub Inspector Circle Kharora District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.01.05 18:42:44 +0530 2 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 03.11.2025, on the basis of the information given by the informant, the Police Authority has conducted the raid and seized total 13.68 Bulk Liters country made liquor from the house of the applicant. On the basis of aforesaid story of the prosecution the present applicant alleged for the offence of 34(2) of C.G. Excise Act in connection with crime no. 128/2025 at Police Station- Excise Sub Inspector Circle. Kharora, District - Raipur (C.G.). 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent persons and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits the applicant is a young person aged about 24 years and has been in judicial custody since 04.11.2025. The learned trial Court failed to appreciate that the applicant is the sole earning member of his family. It further failed to consider that the alleged country-made liquor was in the possession of the applicant on account of a festival at his house and not for any illegal purpose. Except for the alleged country-made liquor, nothing incriminating has been seized from the applicant, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. He further submits that the present applicant has 02 criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, which shows that the present applicant is a habitual offender. As such, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case also considering the fact that the applicant has 2 criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, shows that the present applicant is a habitual offender and also in light of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble 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 it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Chandrasekhar Baghel, involved in Crime No. 128/2025, registered at Police Station – Excise Sub Inspector Circle Kharora District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. 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/-Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav 4