1 CGHC010293262026 2026:CGHC:38686 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7450 of 2026 Rajesh Sonkar S/o Late Makhanlal Sonkar Aged About 42 Years R/o Ward No.8 Bazarpara Charama, Tahsil- Charama, Distt- Uttar Baster Kanker (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station Charama Distt- Uttar Baster Kanker C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 01.09.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.129/2026, registered at Police Station- Charama Distt- Uttar Baster Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2026.09.01 15:41:02 +0530 2 2. That, as per the prosecution case, acting upon information that the applicant Rajesh Sonkar had illegally stored liquor in his chicken-cutting shop for sale, the police conducted a search and allegedly recovered different varieties of country-made and foreign liquor totaling about 10 litres and 260 ml, valued at Rs.5,520, along with sale proceeds of Rs.600, which were seized and taken into police custody. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 19.06.2026, though the charge-sheet has been filed, but the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. He later submits that so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, though the applicant has 24 criminal antecedents, but only one is pending amongst them. He lastly submits that under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years, therefore, he prays grant of bail. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application of the applicant and also the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 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, 3 nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the applicant has 24 criminal antecedents, but as of now, he has already been acquitted in all the cases except one, he is languishing in jail since 19.06.2026, charge-sheet has already been filed and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, as such, the Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 7. Let applicant, Rajesh Sonkar, involved in Crime No.129/2026, registered at Police Station- Charama Distt- Uttar Baster Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned:- (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 them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 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 Section 209 of 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Manpreet