1 CGHC010239632026 2026:CGHC:36865 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5767 of 2026 Smt. Munni Bai Kawade W/o Shri Ramesh Kawade, Aged About 46 Years R/o. Village -Makadikhuna P. S. - Kanker, Distt. North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House O5cer, Police Station - Kanker, Distt. North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 18.08.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as she has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 194/2026, registered at Police Station : Kanker District- North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) for the o<ence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 14.06.2026, the Police of Police Station Kanker, District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.), KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 received secret information from the informant that the applicant had kept country-made liquor in her house situated at Village Makadikhuna. On the basis of the said information, the police conducted a search and allegedly seized 60 bulk liters of country- made liquor kept in Ave plastic jerrycans. Thereafter, notice under Section 94 of the BNSS was issued to the applicant to produce valid documents in respect of the said liquor, but she failed to produce any such document. Consequently, the applicant was arrested for the alleged commission of the o<ence. 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 applicant has no concern with the alleged liquor and there is no evidence available on record to establish that the applicant was in possession of the liquor allegedly seized by the police, particularly when the same was recovered from an open place behind the house. It is further submitted that under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years and in the present case, charge-sheet has Aled before the competent Court and further the applicant has no criminal antecedent and is in jail since 14.06.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been Aled before the competent Court and the applicant has no criminal antecedents however, he submits that 3 from the possession of the present applicant 60 bulk liters of country-made liquor was seized and as such, she is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and in the present case, charge-sheet has been Aled before the competent Court and the quantity of liquor seized from the possession of the applicant i.e. 60 bulk liters of country-made liquor and she is in jail since 14.06.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let applicant, Smt. Munni Bai Kawade, involved in Crime No. 194/2026, registered at Police Station : Kanker District- North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) for the o<ence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall Ale an undertaking to the e<ect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates Axed 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 4 court on each date Axed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without su5cient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date Axed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, 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 Axed 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 su5cient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law. 9. O5ce is directed to send a certiAed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal