1 CGHC010304032026 2026:CGHC:37916 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7422 of 2026 Pippi @ Pritam Dahariya S/o Late Anuj Singh Dahariya Aged About 26 Years R/o Karwa Chowki Belghana, P.S. Kota, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer (S H O) P.S. Kota, Out Post Belghana District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Miss Swati Rani Saraf, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Miss Ankita Shukla, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 24/08/2026 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.529/2026 registered at Police Station Kota, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence under Section 34 (2) of the CG Excise Act. KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Date: 2026.08.26 11:57:29 +0530 2 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on the basis of Secret information the police officials acted, & seized 30 liters of Raw Mahua Liquor amounting to Rs. 3000/- from the possession of the applicant/accused from the open area behind the house of the applicant/accused. & on that basis the crime was registered and the applicant was arrested on 28.06.2026. On the basis of the aforesaid, Crime No. 529/2026 registered at Police Station Kota, District Bilaspur, for an offence U/s 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. Hence the bail application. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime. The actual fact is that the accused was called to the police station for questioning under the ongoing Nijat program & further due to personal vendettas of the police officials the applicant was falsely implicated by them. Even if the prosecution story is taken into consideration, the alleged seizure was not from the conscious possession of the applicant or from the house of the applicant, it is alleged to be from the open area, thus there is high chances of false implication of the applicant in the present case. The applicant has been in jail since 28.06.2026; investigation is complete & chargesheet has been filed, and in view of the nature of excise prosecutions and number of witnesses, there is every likelihood of trial taking a considerable time to conclude, making continued incarceration disproportionate to the stage of proceedings. In such circumstances, continued pre-trial detention 3 of the applicant is harsh and not warranted in the interest of justice. The applicant has one criminal antecedent under the Excise Act, in which fine was imposed on the applicant. Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the applicant has one criminal antecedent under the Excise Act, in which fine was imposed on the applicant, and the charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant. Therefore, the bail application may be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that the charge sheet has already been submitted against the applicant, the applicant has one criminal antecedent under the Excise Act, in which fine was imposed on the applicant, which is mentioned in the bail application, the applicant is in jail since 28.6.2026 and conclusion of trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Let the Applicant – Pippi @ Pritam Dahariya, involved in Crime No.529/2026 registered at Police Station Kota, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence under Section 34 (2) of the CG Excise Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two 4 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 their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them 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) 5 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 applicants are 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 them 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. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Barve