1 CGHC010223652026 2026:CGHC:32122 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5266 of 2026 Rajendra Verma Son of Shri Ghanshyam Verma Aged About 40 Years Resident of Village Dhara, Police Chowki Mohara, Police Station Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh (As Per Charge Sheet ) ... Applicant versus The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ( As Per Charge Sheet ) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Punit Ruparel, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board 27.07.2026 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. 0257/2026, registered at Police Station - Dongargarh, District – Rajnandgaon, (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the applicant was arrested in connection with the aforementioned crime on 11.05.2026. The allegation against the applicant is that, acting upon secret information received from an informant, the police recovered 5.400 bulk litres of country-made ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.07.28 17:32:19 +0530 2 liquor, allegedly found in a cart near the applicant’s house. On the basis of the said recovery, the aforesaid offence was registered against the applicant. After completion of the investigation, the police filed the charge-sheet against the applicant on 25.05.2026. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and that no seizure has been effected from the exclusive possession of the applicant. He further submits that though the applicant has 12 criminal cases registered against him, out of the said cases, in 6 cases he has been sentenced only to payment of fine and was released by the Trial Court. In 3 cases, he has been acquitted. One case pertains to a different person and does not relate to the present applicant. Thus, only 2 criminal cases are presently pending against the applicant. He also submits that under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, the minimum punishment prescribed is one year and the maximum punishment is three years. It is further submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 11.05.2026, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable amount of time. Therefore, he prays that the applicant be released on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. She further submits that the applicant has two criminal antecedents of a similar nature, which indicate that he is a habitual offender. Therefore, considering his criminal antecedents and the nature of the allegations, it is contended that the applicant is not entitled to the grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case also considering the fact that the applicant has 02 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 applicant – Rajendra Verma, involved in Crime No. 0257/2026, registered at Police Station - Dongargarh, District – Rajnandgaon, (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