Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 36745 (CHH)

Dhanesh Kumar Nagesh v. State of Chhattisgarh

MCRC/8457/2026 · 2026-09-22

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010355062026 2026:CGHC:41387 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8457 of 2026 Dhanesh Kumar Nagesh S/o Paras Ram Nagesh Aged About 34 Years R/o Dadargaon Purana, Ward No.07, Derapara, Post Chhura, Police Station Chhura, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Chhura, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Shri Mohammad Afroz Athar, Advocate appears through V.C. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Priya Sharma, 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. 131/2026 registered at Police Station Chhura, District Gariyaband (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 police of Police Station Chhura arrested the present applicant for keeping illegally in his possession 8 liters of country made mahua liquor. Thereafter, the aforesaid case was registered against the present applicant. Digitally signed by ALLENA ANJANI KUMAR Date: 2026.09.24 10:34:57 +0530 2 3. Learned Counsel for the applicant would submit that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and the said 8 liters of country made Mahua 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 24.07.2026, 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 there are two criminal antecedents of similar nature against the present applicant registered in the year 2024-2025 and the applicant may abscond, 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 fact that 8 bulk liters country made Mahua liquor was seized from the possession of the applicant, charge-sheet has been filed and he is in jail since 24.07.2026 and further that, there are two criminal antecedents of similar nature, registered against the applicant in the year 2024-2025 and that, 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 application is entitled to be released on bail in this case. Accordingly, the instant bail applicant 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