1 CGHC010249462026 2026:CGHC:34801 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6096 of 2026 Abhishek Yadav S/o Harkalal Yadav Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Bhandargaon, Police Station And Tehsil Udaipur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh. ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Udaipur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rohit Sharma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 07.08.2026 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. 97/2026 registered at Police Station – Udaipur District Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act. 2. The case of prosecution in brief is that on 06.06.2026, the applicant was arrested and, during the course of the proceedings, illegal liquor VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.08.07 15:52:14 +0530 2 was seized from his rented house situated at Bhandargaon. The seized articles comprised various brands of foreign and country-made liquor, having a total quantity of 37.980 litres, along with cash amounting to Rs.800/-. The total value of the seized articles is stated to be Rs.26,740/-. It is further alleged that the applicant was found in possession of liquor in excess of the permissible limit, and accordingly, an offence under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act was registered against him. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the alleged seizure has already been effected by the prosecution and nothing remains to be recovered from the applicant; therefore, his further detention is not required. Learned counsel further submits that the case is triable by the competent Court and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, and therefore, keeping the applicant in custody for an indefinite period would serve no useful purpose. It is also submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 06.10.2025 and has already undergone a substantial period of incarceration. Lastly, learned counsel submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is not a habitual offender. On these grounds, learned counsel for the applicant prays that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- 3 diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence levelled against the present applicant, the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, and that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 06.06.2026, coupled with the fact that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Let applicant, Abhishek Yadav, involved in Crime No. 97/2026 registered at Police Station – Udaipur District Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, be released on bail on 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 him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (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, 4 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav