1 2026:CGHC:11051 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2034 of 2026 Indra Kumar Sahu S/o Manik Sahu Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Kallutola, Thana/tahsil- Chhuriya, Distt.- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Sho, Thana- Chhuriya, Distt.- Rajnandgaon(C.G.) ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Samir Singh, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 03.03.2026 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. 238/2025 registered at Police Station -Chhuriya District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 28.09.2025, the police VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.03.03 15:29:42 +0530 2 officials received secret information from an informant to the effect that the applicant had kept country-made liquor in a Mahtari Express vehicle for the purpose of illegal sale. Acting upon the said information, the police officials proceeded to the spot and conducted a search. During the search, approximately 138.240 bulk litres of country-made liquor were allegedly seized from the possession of the applicant. Thereafter, the present applicant was arrested in accordance with law. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence merely on the basis of suspicion. It is contended that the applicant has no concern whatsoever with the liquor allegedly seized, as the seizure was effected from an open and accessible place, and there is no material on record to establish his exclusive possession over the same. It is further submitted that the offence under the Chhattisgarh Excise Act has been registered without there being any evidence of conscious or exclusive possession. The deposition of the seizure witness, annexed as Annexure A-3 (Colly), also does not support the prosecution case. Additionally, it is argued that the prosecution agency did not properly measure the alleged seized liquor at the time of seizure, thereby casting serious doubt on the authenticity and legality of the alleged recovery. It is further submitted that out of 11 prosecution witnesses, only two have been examined so far, and both of them, including the seizure witnesses, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application 3 of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case and 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 facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and further taking into account that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court and the applicant has remained in jail since 28.09.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. Let the Applicant – Indra Kumar Sahu, involved in Crime No. 238/2025 registered at Police Station -Chhuriya District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 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 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 4 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