1 CGHC010278862026 2026:CGHC:31733 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6669 of 2026 Umesh Kumar Verma S/o Late Ramkumar Verma Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Jalso P.S. Koni, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S H O To P.S. Koni, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mrs. Shital Soni, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 24.07.2026 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. 246/2026, registered at Police Station - Koni, District - Bilaspur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief, is that, on the basis of secret information received through informant, on 19.05.2026 the Officers of PS Koni has recovered 50.000 Liters of Country-Made Liquor valued VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.25 13:03:50 +0530 2 Rs. 10,000/- from the illegal possession of the applicant. Accordingly the offence under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act has been registered and the applicant has been arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the alleged liquor was not recovered from the exclusive possession of the applicant and that the prosecution has failed to establish his conscious possession. The alleged offence is triable by the learned Magistrate and is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. It is further submitted that the value of the alleged seized property is relatively low and that the legality of the search and seizure, including compliance with the mandatory provisions of the BNSS and the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, is a matter to be examined during trial. The applicant is 30-year-old and he is in jail since 19.05.2026, therefore, she prayed that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposed the bail application and submitted that, although the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant is not entitled to the benefit of bail in view of his criminal antecedent. It is submitted that three criminal cases of a similar nature is pending against the applicant, namely Crime Nos. 231/2025,474/2023 and 303 of 2025 registered at P.S. Koni, District Bilaspur, for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. Learned State Counsel contended that the pendency of the said case reflects the applicant's propensity to 3 indulge in similar criminal activities and prima facie indicates that he is a habitual offender. It is further submitted that, if released on bail, there is every likelihood that the applicant may indulge in similar offences or misuse the liberty granted to him, on these ground applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also taking into account the fact that three cases are pending against the applicant, which clearly indicates that the applicant is a habitual offender, and further, in light of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, (2022) 8 SCC 559, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court cancelled the bail granted to the accused on the ground of having previous criminal antecedents, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present case does not warrant the grant of regular bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Umesh Kumar Verma , involved in Crime No. 246/2026, registered at Police Station - Koni, District - Bilaspur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, is rejected. Sd/- (RavindraKumar Agrawal) Judge vaibhav