1 CGHC010162882026 2026:CGHC:28273 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3988 of 2026 Rajendra Banjare S/o Subelal Banjare Aged About 41 Years R/o Manva Post Manikchauri, Tahsil And P.S. Pachpedi, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Pachpedi, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ashok Dixit, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 08.07.2026 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.86/2026, registered at Police Station - Pachpedi, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that the police has received secret VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.08 18:29:28 +0530 2 information through informant is that on the date of incident the unknown persons have kept illegal liquor in his possession to sell and police has seized 30 litres country made Mahua liquor from place of incident at open place near field of courtyard of applicant 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. 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 made from an open 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 further submits that the investigating agency has failed to conduct a fair and proper investigation and no prima facie material has been collected to connect the applicant with the alleged offence. It is also contended that there is no motive or intention attributable to the applicant for committing the alleged offence. Learned counsel submits that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 07.04.2026, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. His continued incarceration would cause undue hardship to his family, as he is required to maintain and take care of its members. It is lastly submitted that the applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, there is no likelihood of his absconding or 3 tampering with the prosecution evidence, and he 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 him bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, that the charge-sheet has already been filed and that the applicant has remained in judicial jail since 07.04.2026, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let applicant, Rajendra Banjare, involved in Crime No.86/2026, registered at Police Station - Pachpedi, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, 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 4 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 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