1 CGHC010218492026 2026:CGHC:30972 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5292 of 2026 Yado Ram Bandhe S/o Samaru Ram Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Hathkoj, Police Station Fingeshwar, District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The S.H.O., Police Station Fingeshwar, District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ankush Soni, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 21.07.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 116/2026, registered at Police Station - Fingeshwar, District – Gariyaband (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 11.05.2026, the police of Police Station Fingeshwar, District Gariyaband (C.G.), allegedly recovered and seized 6.300 bulk litres of Masala liquor from the possession of the present applicant. On the basis of the said seizure, F.I.R. bearing Crime No. 116/2026 was registered at Police Station Fingeshwar, District ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.07.22 16:49:28 +0530 2 Gariyaband (C.G.), on 12.05.2026 under the relevant provisions of law. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 12.05.2026. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and that no seizure has been made from his exclusive possession. He further submits that the applicant has only 01 criminal antecedent under the Excise Act. He also submits that under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, the minimum punishment is one year and the maximum punishment is three years. The applicant has been in jail since 12.05.2026, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable amount of time. Therefore, he prays for the applicant’s release on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. He submits that the present applicant has 05 criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, which shows that the present applicant is a habitual offender. As such, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case also considering the fact that the applicant has 05 criminal antecedents of the similar nature, shows that the present applicant is a habitual offender and also in light of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, reported in (2022) 8 SCC 559, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court had cancelled the bail granted to the accused therein on the ground that the accused had previous antecedents, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the 3 applicant – Yado Ram Bandhe, involved in Crime No. 116/2026, registered at Police Station - Fingeshwar, District – Gariyaband (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, is rejected. 7. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 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