1 CGHC010170282026 2026:CGHC:29994 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4075 of 2026 Aditya Raj Jangde @ Pappu S/o Late Shri Ram Ji Jangde Aged About 29 Years, R/o Bajrang Mohalla, Dadarkhurd, Tahsil And District Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Sahayta Kendra Manikpur, Police Station Kotwali, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anshul Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 15.07.2026 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 196/2026 registered at Police Station – Kotwali, District – Korba (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. As per the prosecution case, upon receiving secret information that three persons, namely, Aditya Raj Jangde, Sakhiram, and Santosh Kumar Mahilange, were manufacturing and selling country-made liquor near Kanchandi Nallah, the police reached the spot and allegedly seized 20 ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.07.16 10:58:58 +0530 2 litres of country-made Mahua liquor from the possession of the present applicant and 5 litres each from the possession of the other two co- accused persons. Thereafter, all three accused persons were arrested, and an FIR for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915 was registered against them. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that the alleged illicit liquor was not seized from the possession of the present applicant. He also submits that under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, the minimum prescribed punishment is one year and the maximum punishment is three years. He further submits that, though the applicant has 17 criminal antecedents, out of the five cases registered under the Excise Act, he has already been acquitted in four cases, while in one case he has deposited the fine amount. He also submits that two cases are registered against the applicant under the IPC, out of which he has been acquitted in one case on the basis of a compromise, whereas the other case is pending at the stage of framing of charges. The remaining cases are proceedings under the Istagasa. Copies of the acquittal orders have also been annexed to the present bail application. He further submits that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 03.03.2026 and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable amount of time. Therefore, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the fact that, out of the 17 criminal antecedents attributed to the applicant, he has been acquitted in four cases under the Excise Act, has deposited the fine amount in one case under the Excise Act, has been acquitted in one IPC case on the basis of compromise, while the remaining IPC case is pending at the stage of framing of charges and the rest are Istagasa proceedings, coupled with the fact that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 03.03.2026 and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. 7. Let the applicant – Aditya Raj Jangde @ Pappu, involved in Crime No. 196/2026 registered at Police Station – Kotwali, District – Korba (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. 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 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 his under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (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 his, 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 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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek