1 CGHC010259112026 2026:CGHC:30931 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6211 of 2026 Keshav Panika @ Golu S/o Shri Lakshman Panika Aged About 25 Years R/o Ward No. 01, Near Railway Station, Loco Colony, Manendragarh, Tehsil and Police Station Manendragarh, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station City Kotwali, District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ramsajiwan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 21.07.2026 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 180/2025 registered at Police Station - City Kotwali, District - Manendragarh-Chirmiri- Bharatpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.07.22 17:16:44 +0530 2 2. Earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 05.02.2026 passed in MCRC No. 1300/2026. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 23.10.2025, Assistant Sub-Inspector Chetanram Rajwade, along with the police staff, was on routine patrolling duty when 17.250 litres of liquor and Scooty bearing Registration No. CG 16 CK 4133 were allegedly seized from the possession of the principal accused, Rahul Kesharwani. During the course of investigation, on the basis of the memorandum statement of the principal accused, the present applicant was arrested on 03.11.2025, and the aforesaid offence was registered against him. Upon completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet (final report) was filed before the competent trial Court. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 05.02.2026 passed in MCRC No. 1300 of 2026, primarily on the ground that the applicant has two previous criminal antecedents under the Excise Act. Learned counsel further submits that the prosecution is unnecessarily causing delay in the trial, which is evident from the copies of the order sheets of the trial Court annexed as Annexure A/5 to the present bail application. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicant has been in judicial custody since 03.11.2025, and the trial is not likely to conclude in the near future. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected 3 on the ground that he has two previous criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, which indicates that he is a habitual offender. It is further submitted that no new or substantial change in circumstances has been brought on record in the present bail application. Therefore, it is contended that the present bail application is liable to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Taking into consideration the fact and circumstances of the case and the fact that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 05.02.2026 passed in MCRC No. 1300/2026 on the ground that the applicant is having two previous criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, which shows that the he is a habitual offender, and it cannot be said to be a case of false implication and no new ground has been raised by the applicant, also in light of the judgment rendered by the 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. 8. Accordingly, the second bail application of applicant – Keshav Panika @ Golu involved in Crime No. 180/2025 registered at Police Station - City Kotwali, District - Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, rejected at this stage. 9. Needless to say that the trial Court is at liberty to proceed to with the 4 trial and conclude the same, expeditiously. 10. The Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti