1 CGHC010261082026 2026:CGHC:37202 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6108 of 2026 Dheeraj Das Manikpuri S/o Uttara Kumar Manikpuri Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Jognipali, Police Station And Tahsil Saraipali, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station Saraipali, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sheshav Shekhar Barik, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 19.08.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 204/2026 registered at Police Station – Saraipali, District- Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.08.19 17:43:41 +0530 2 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 15.06.2026 during town patrolling, the Police of Police Station, Saraipali has received secret information through informant that one person is transporting liquor in without number Activa vehicle from Village Arjunda. On the basis of said information, the police personnel conducted raid and allegedly recovered 30 liters Mahua liquor from illegal possession of the applicant. Accordingly the offence U/s 34(2) of 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, but was allegedly seized from an open place, and therefore no conscious possession of the contraband can be attributed to him. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is the sole bread-earner of his family and his continued pre- trial incarceration is causing serious hardship to his family in maintaining their livelihood. It is also submitted that the alleged offence is not punishable with imprisonment for life or death and that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 15.06.2026. The applicant undertakes to appear before the Trial Court regularly during the course of trial and not to misuse the liberty of bail. In these circumstances, learned counsel prays that the applicant may kindly be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the applicant has one previous criminal antecedents and that the charge-sheet has already 3 been filed before the competent Court. Therefore, considering the criminal antecedents of the applicant and the stage of investigation, he is not entitled to the grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the applicant, the period of detention, as the applicant has been in judicial custody since 15.06.2026, the fact that charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant. 7. Let the Applicant – Dheeraj Das Manikpuri , involved in Crime No. 204/2026 registered at Police Station – Saraipali, District- Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two local sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against his under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 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 Vaibhav