1 CGHC010190062026 2026:CGHC:29461 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4468 of 2026 Saidul Karingala S/o Malaiya Karingala Aged About 49 Years Occupation Kabadi, R/o House No. 3-17, Village Akaram, P.S. Sali Gaurarang, Distt. Nawgoda (Telangana), At Present R/o Village Supa, P.S. And Tahsil Pussour, And Distt. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. of The Police Station Pussour, And Distt. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Dhirendra Prasad Mishra, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 13.07.2026 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. 111/2026, registered at Police Station – Pussour, District – Riagarh, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(1), 34(2) and 59(A)of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that, based on secret information received from an informant, on 14.04.2026, Assistant Sub-Inspector Premsai Bhagat of Police Station Pussour received information that a ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.07.14 11:41:11 +0530 2 person had kept a large quantity of illicit Tadi for sale outside the closed Welcome Dhaba at Village Supa and was waiting for customers. Acting upon the said information, the police officer, along with the accompanying staff and witnesses, reached the spot, cordoned off the area, and conducted a search of the accused and the 11 plastic jerrycans found in his possession. During the search, a total of 265 litres of illicit Tadi was allegedly seized from his possession. Thereafter, the applicant was arrested on 14.04.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 34(1), 34(2), and 59(A) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is falsely implicated in this case. He also submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents. He further submits that under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years, and the applicant is in jail since 14.04.2026 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and also endorse the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case-diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the applicant has no previous antecedents and also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed and he is in jail since 14.04.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 3 7. Let applicant, Saidul Karingala, involved in Crime No. 111/2026, registered at Police Station – Pussour, District – Riagarh, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(1), 34(2) and 59(A)of the C.G. 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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient 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 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 4 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 Abhishek