1 CGHC010208092026 2026:CGHC:29054 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4876 of 2026 1 - Tikeshwar Kosariya S/o Suklal Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Savitripur, P.S. Sankra, Tahsil Pithora, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh 2 - Hemantlal Kurrey S/o Gajpati Kurrey Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Savitripur, P.S. Sankra, Tahsil Pithora, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh 3 - Loknath Barik S/o Satpati Barik Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Savitripur, P.S. Sankra, Tahsil Pithora, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh 4 - Lakhan Kurrey S/o Gajpati Kurrey Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Savitripur, P.S. Sankra, Tahsil Pithora, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Sankra District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10/07/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for 2 grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 70/2026 registered at Police Station Sankra District Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that as per secret information received from the informant, the Police of concerned Police Station seized 260 liters of country made Mahua liquor from the house of the applicant, which led to the registration of alleged offence against the applicant and subsequently, the applicants were arrested. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case and 260 bulk liters of country made Mahua liquor was not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant. He further submits that under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years. He also submits that applicant No.1 has only one criminal antecedent, which is of the year 2024 under the Excise Act and rest of the applicants have no criminal antecedents, further the applicants are in jail since 08.04.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4. Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and applicant No.1 has one criminal antecedent of the year 2024 under the Excise Act. She 3 further submits that 260 bulk liters of the country made Mahua liquor was recovered from the house of the applicant, therefore, the applicants are not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing 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 applicants and the fact that applicant No.1 has only one criminal antecedent, which is of the year 2024 under the Excise Act and rest of the applicants have no criminal antecedents, further the applicants are in jail since 08.04.2026 and the charge-sheet has been filed, further the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, as such, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the applicants - Tikeshwar Kosariya, Hemantlal Kurrey, Loknath Barik and Lakhan Kurrey, involved in Crime No. 70/2026 registered at Police Station Sankra District Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each 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 they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in 4 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their 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, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil