Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 26044 (CHH)

YOGESH PAHADI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/5542/2026 · 2026-07-09

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010232442026 2026:CGHC:29148 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5542 of 2026 Yogesh Pahadi S/o Govind Pahadi Aged About 25 Years R/o Satpara, Police Station Abhanpur, Tahsil Abhanpur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Abhanpur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Pradeep Rathore, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, P.L. HON'BLE SHRI RAMESH SINHA, CHIEF JUSTICE ORDER ON BOARD 10.07.2026 1. This is the 1st 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. 109/2026 registered at Police Station – Abhanpur, SAURABH YADAV Digitally signed by SAURABH YADAV Date: 2026.07.13 11:26:24 +0530 2 District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offences under Section 34 (2) of Excise Act. 2. As per the prosecution story, on 05.04.2026 during the patrolling the police official have received secret information from informant acting upon the information the police official reached on spot and conducted raid and recovered 6.300 bulk liter of country made liquor from the illegal possession of the applicant, thereafter arrested the applicant. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is in incarceration since 05.04.2026. He submits that the evidence collected by the prosecution is no prima facie sufficient to hold the applicant guilty of the alleged offence. He further submits that charge-sheet has been filed and the conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, it is prayed that he may be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the application and submits that there are 8 previous antecedents registered against the applicant, which are still pending, therefore, the present bail application of the applicant be rejected. 3 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the case diary, this Court finds that there are previous cases which have been registered against the applicant, he is a habitual offender. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the allegations regarding the applicant's involvement in the crime in question, and also in light of the judgment rendered by the 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 is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 6. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Yogesh Pahadi involved in Crime No. 109/2026 registered at Police Station – Abhanpur, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offences under Section 34 (2) of Excise Act is hereby rejected. 7. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Saurabh