1 CGHC010266512026 2026:CGHC:29958 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No.1111 of 2026 1 - Nandkishore Verma S/o Mr. Kumar Verma Aged About 31 Years Caste Lodhi, Occupation Labour, R/o Village Mohara, Tehsil Dongargarh, Distt. Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. Applicant (s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Dongargarh (Chouki Mohara), Distt. Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. Respondent(s) For Applicant (s) : Mr. Raza Ali, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, PL Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 15.07.2026 1. This first anticipatory bail application filed under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.238/2026 registered at Police Station Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34 (2) of Excise Act and Section 111 of BNS. Digitally signed by R NIRALA 2 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that applicant was found in possession of upon receiving information from the informer the respondent police on dated 07.05.2026 has conducted the raid near Mudiya Pool near Nala and found 81 bulk liter of illicit Goa Whisky were loading by some person and further alleged that two persons ran away and arrested the remaining accused and registered the FIR against accused persons and taken memorandum statement of the arrested accused person and based on their memorandum Statement the present Applicant has been arrayed as accused. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in crime in question. It is further submitted that no liquor was seized from the applicant and only on the basis of the memorandum of other accused persons, the applicant has been arrayed as an accused in the crime in question and there is no documentary evidence available on record against the applicant, therefore, the present applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel for the non-applicant/State, would oppose the bail application of the applicant and submit that there are 7 criminal antecedents against the applicant, as such he is a habitual offender. Therefore, the applicant may not be enlarged on anticipatory bail at this stage. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, gravity of the offence and nature of allegation levelled against the present applicant and for the fact that there are 7 criminal antecedents against the applicant, therefore, without commenting anything on merits, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant at this stage. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is rejected. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Nirala