1 CGHC010335922026 2026:CGHC:38842 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8142 of 2026 Shiv Pardhi S/o Late Rajkumar Pardhi, Aged About 24 Years R/o - Village Khursidih, Pardhi Mohalla Chauki - Nagpura, Police Station - Pulgoan, Tehsil And District - Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through SHO Police Station - Pulgoan, District – Durg (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant(s) : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 02.09.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 528/2026, registered at Police Station – Pulgoan, District – Durg (CG) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that the Police of Police Station – Pulgoan, District – Durg (C.G.) has received a secret information through the informant and on the basis of such information the Police has seized a total of 6.450 liters of liquor from the possession of the applicant. Thereafter, the applicant has been arrested by the Police and the offence was registered. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is in jail since 07.06.2026 and trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that a total of 6.450 liters of liquor has been seized from the possession of the present applicant. It is further submitted that there are 2 criminal antecedents of the applicant under the Excise Act which are still pending, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of the offence, material available in the case dairy and the fact that there are 2 criminal antecedents of the applicant under the Excise Act which are still pending, and no plausible explanation has been given for the same, which shows that applicant is a habitual offender and he has misused the bail granted to him earlier, and also in light of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, reported in (2022) 8 SCC 559, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court had cancelled the bail granted to the accused therein on the ground that the accused had previous antecedents, this Court is of the opinion that is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant – Shiv Pardhi, involved in 3 Crime No. 528/2026, registered at Police Station – Pulgoan, District – Durg (CG) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed with the trial and conclude the same, expeditiously. 9. 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 Rajshekhar