Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 36626 (CHH)

KHAGESH KHUNTE v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/8466/2026 · 2026-09-22

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010347112026 2026:CGHC:41384 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8466 of 2026 Khagesh Khunte S/o Amarnath Khunte, Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Sonpur, P. S. Saliha, District Balodabazar Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Office, Police Station Sankra, District Mahasamund C. G. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Shri Sudhir Kumar Sahu, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, P.L. (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY) Order on Board 23/09/2026 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. 139/2026 registered at Police Station Sankra, District Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, 2015 against the present applicant. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that when the Police was on patrolling, they received information that the applicant illegally kept liquor in his vehicle to sell the same and upon such information, police reached the spot and seized 30 liters of country made mahua Kachchi liquor. Thereafter, the aforesaid case was registered against the Digitally signed by ALLENA ANJANI KUMAR Date: 2026.09.24 10:34:58 +0530 2 present applicant. 3. Learned Counsel for the applicant would submit that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and the said 30 liters of country made Mahua kachchi liquor was not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant. It is further argued by him that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years and the present applicant has been in jail since 07.08.2026, conclusion of the trial is likely to take some considerable time. Therefore, he would pray for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the bail application and submit that the applicant may abscond if the bail is granted to him, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Having considered the quantity of liquor, i.e., 30 liters of country made Mahua kachchi liquor seized from the possession of the applicant; he is in jail since 07.08.2026; there is no criminal antecedent against the applicant and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, without making any observation on merits of the matter, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed. 3 7. Let the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court; (ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, & (iii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Anjani