1 CGHC010254472026 2026:CGHC:29304 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5950 of 2026 Rahul Nishad S/o Prakash Nishad Aged About 24 Years R/o Bajrang Nagar, Kandra Para, Durg, P.S. Durg, Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S H O Police Station Durg Kotwali, Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, 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 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.205/2026, registered at Police Station- Durg Kotwali, District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, on 21.04.2026, the concerned Police Station received a secret information that certain unknown persons were illegally selling liquor near Nayapara Road, Durg, at an open place. Acting upon the said information, the police reached the spot and conducted a search, during which a yellow-coloured plastic bag containing 34 bottles of country-made liquor, each measuring 180 ml, was allegedly found. The total quantity of the seized liquor was 6.120 bulk litres. Since the applicant was allegedly found in possession of the said liquor without any valid licence or authority, the police seized the contraband, completed the requisite formalities, and registered the present crime against the applicant for the aforesaid offence. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.04.2026, though the charge-sheet has been filed, but the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. He later submits that so far as criminal antecedents of the applicants are concerned, though he has 06 criminal antecedents in total, they all are under the IPC of year 2017 to 2022 except only one previous case registered against him under the Excise Act of year 2024 pending against him. He lastly submits that under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years, therefore, he prays grant of bail. 3 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application submits that 6.120 bulk litres of illegal liquor was recovered from the possession of the applicant. Hence, his bail application is liable to be rejected. 5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant, quantity of liquor seized and the fact that so far as criminal antecedents of the applicants are concerned, he has only one previous case registered against him, under the Excise Act of year 2024 pending against him and rest are under the IPC which are old and stale, charge-sheet has already been filed and he is in jail since 22.04.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 6. Let applicant, Rahul Nishad, involved in Crime No.205/2026, registered at Police Station- Durg Kotwali, District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants 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 4 law. (ii) The applicants 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 them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 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 Section 209 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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. 5 7. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal