1 CGHC010195512026 2026:CGHC:28758 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4778 of 2026 1 - Sheikh Rasid S/o Sheikh Munavvar Aged About 42 Years R/o Diprapara, P. S. Sarangarh, Teh - Sarangarh, Distt - Sarangarh - Bilaigarh (C.G.) 2 - Anil Kumar Yadav S/o Jhaduram Yadav Aged About 32 Years R/o Diprapara, P. S. Sarangarh, Teh - Sarangarh, Distt- Sarangarh - Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Sarangarh (Police Outpost Kanakbira), District - Sarangarh - Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicants : Shri Tanuj Patwardhan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Shri Shubham Bajpai, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 09/07/2026 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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.200/2026 registered at Police Station Sarangarh (Police KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Date: 2026.07.13 13:26:32 +0530 2 outpost Kanakbira) District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 34 (2) & 59 (A) of the Excise Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 2.5.2026, based on information received from the informant, the concerned Police intercepted the applicants near village Ramtek and recovered 18 liters of Romeo Desi Plain liquor and a scooty from the present applicants. Thereafter the FIR was registered against the applicants. Hence the bail application. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the crime. There is no evidence to establish that the applicants were actively involved in the said crime. The applicants do not have any criminal antecedents. The applicants are in jail since 2.5.2026. Therefore, the applicants may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge sheet has been submitted against the applicants. He further submits that so far as applicant No.1 – Sheikh Rasid is concerned, there are 3 criminal antecedents registered against him under the Excise Act. So far as applicant No.2 – Anil Kumar Yadav is concerned, there is no criminal antecedents registered against him. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that the charge sheet has already been submitted against the applicants, further considering that as regards applicant No.1 – Sheikh Rasid, there are 3 criminal antecedents registered against him under the Excise Act, and as regards applicant No.2 – Anil Kumar Yadav, there is no criminal antecedents registered against him and he is in jail since 2.5.2026, this Court is of the view that so far as applicant No.1 – Sheikh Rasid is concerned, he is not entitled to be released on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application in respect of Applicant No.1 – Sheikh Rasid, involved in Crime No.200/2026 registered at Police Station Sarangarh (Police outpost Kanakbira), District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offence under Section 34 (2) & 59 (A) of the Excise Act is rejected. 8. However, considering the fact that there is no criminal antecedents against applicant No.2 – Anil Kumar Yadav, he is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 9. Let Applicant No.2 – Anil Kumar Yadav, involved in Crime No.200/2026 registered at Police Station Sarangarh (Police outpost Kanakbira), District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offence under Section 34 (2) & 59 (A) of the Excise Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- 4 (i) Applicant No.2 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) Applicant No.2 shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, Applicant No.2 misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and he 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) Applicant No.2 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. 5 If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the Applicant No.2 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. 10.Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Barve