1 CGHC010171502026 2026:CGHC:28271 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3995 of 2026 Ishwar Tandon S/o Tekram Tandon Aged About 19 Years Resident Of Village Nawagaon, Ward No. 09, P.S. Kharora, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station Kharora, District Raipur (C.G.) ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Bharat Lal Sahu, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08.07.2026 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. 171/2026 registered at Police Station - Kharora, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that he police has received VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.08 18:29:28 +0530 2 secret information through informant is that the date of incident 29.03.2026 the unknown person has kept illegal liquor in his possession to sell and police has seized 21.600 ml. litres country made hand liquor from incident place at open place and he did not produce any document of seized liquor and hence police has registered a case for offence punishable under section 34(2) of the Excise Act against the applicant and after rejecting bail application of the applicant, this bail application is being preferred before the Hon'ble Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no nexus with the alleged incident. It is contended that no incriminating article or illicit country-made liquor has been recovered from the conscious or exclusive possession of the applicant, as the alleged seizure was effected from an open and crowded place. It is further submitted that the applicant had no knowledge of the seized liquor and has been implicated without any proper investigation. Learned counsel submits that the investigating officer failed to conduct a fair and proper investigation and that no prima facie material has been collected to connect the applicant with the alleged offence. It is further contended that there is no motive or intention attributable to the applicant for committing the alleged offence. Learned counsel also submits that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 29.03.2026, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time; therefore, the applicant's continued detention would cause undue hardship to the family. It is lastly submitted that the applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the 3 cause title, there is no likelihood of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence, and the applicant is ready and willing to furnish adequate bail bonds and abide by all such terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court while granting bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the applicant has one previous criminal antecedent, therefore, he is not entitled to the grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the applicant, and further taking into account the period of detention, as the applicant has remained in judicial custody since 29.03.2026, and the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant. 7. Let the Applicant – Ishwar Tandon, involved in Crime No. 171/2026 registered at Police Station - Kharora, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, be released on bail on his 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 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 his 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. 8. 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 Vaibhav