1 CGHC010262602026 2026:CGHC:38675 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6258 of 2026 Dilip Kumar Gaikwad S/o- Babulal Gaikwad (Wrongly Mentioned As Gayakward) Aged About 39 Years (Complete Name Not Mentioned) R/o- Village Nardha, Police Station Jamul, Tehsil And District-Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - District Magistrate Durg, District- Durg (C.G.) ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Roshan Singh Lamba, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 01.09.2026 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. 445/2026 registered at Police Station – Jamul District - Durg (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.09.01 16:07:03 +0530 2 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 27.06.2026, during town patrolling, police personnel namely Kesendra Singh Chauhan received secret information to the effect that a person residing at Village Nardha was illegally selling liquor from his house. Acting upon the said information, the police reached the house of the applicant and conducted a raid, during which the applicant was allegedly found in possession of 8.100 bulk litres of country-made liquor, which was seized from his possession. The police also seized a sum of Rs.2,200/- from the applicant. Thereafter, the applicant was taken into custody and formally arrested, and the seized liquor was taken into possession for the purpose of investigation. Accordingly, the aforesaid offence was registered against the applicant and investigation was commenced. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case by the police personnel due to previous enmity. It is further submitted that the alleged liquor was not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant, but from the house where other persons are also residing, and therefore, the alleged recovery cannot be attributed exclusively to the applicant. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is the sole bread earner of his family and his continued incarceration would cause serious hardship to his family. It is also submitted that the charge-sheet has not yet been filed and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. Learned counsel submits that the applicant is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court and prays that he may kindly be enlarged on bail. Any other ground shall be urged at the time of 3 hearing. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the applicant has five previous criminal antecedent, therefore, 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, and further taking into account the period of detention, as the applicant has remained in judicial custody since 28.06.2026, and the fact that the 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 – Dilip Kumar Gaikwad, involved in Crime No. 445/2026 registered at Police Station – Jamul District - Durg (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. 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 she 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 4 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against his 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 her 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