1 CGHC010330922026 2026:CGHC:38123 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7887 of 2026 1 - Santosh Kawasi S/o Samaru Kawasi Aged About 26 Years R/o Bedmaras, P.S. Tongpal, District Sukma Chhattisgarh 2 - Sukhram Markam S/o Bodaram Aged About 25 Years R/o Bedmaras, P.S. Tongpal, District Sukma Chhattisgarh ... Applicants Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Sukuma Distt. Sukuma Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) _____________________________________________________ For Applicants : Mr. Vikas A. Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, PL. HON'BLE SHRI RAMESH SINHA , CHIEF JUSTICE ORDER ON BOARD 25.08.2026 1. The Applicants have preferred this 1st Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in SAURABH YADAV Digitally signed by SAURABH YADAV Date: 2026.08.25 16:16:10 +0530 2 connection with Crime No. 41/2026 registered at Police Station – Sukuma, District: Sukuma (C.G.), for the offence under Section 34(2) of Excise Act. 2. That, as per the prosecution story, on 11.06.2026, the Assistant Sub-Inspector posted at Police Station Sukuma received secret information that two persons were in possession of foreign liquor and were proceeding via Bypass Kumharras towards Pusamipara. Upon search, a total quantity of 15.600 litres of foreign liquor was seized from the possession of the Applicants. Thereafter, the present case was registered against the Applicants. Hence, this bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the Applicants submits that the Applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. The Applicants have been in custody since 11.06.2026. He further submits that the Applicants have no criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has already been filed, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. Therefore, it is prayed that the Applicants may kindly be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the State opposed the bail application and submits that charge-sheet has been filed 3 before the competent Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the parties, the nature of the allegations, the period of pre- trial detention, the quantity of the seized liquor, the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed, the fact that the Applicants have no criminal antecedents, and further considering the likelihood of the trial taking considerable time, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to allow the application. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 7. Let Applicant No. 1 – Santosh Kawasi and Applicant No. 2 – Sukhram Markam involved in Crime No. 41/2026 registered at Police Station – Sukuma, District: Sukuma (C.G.), for the offence under Section 34(2) of Excise Act be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond with two 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. 4 (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, 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 Saurabh