1 CGHC010349532026 2026:CGHC:41363 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8435 of 2026 1 - Vishal Jaswani S/o Namdev Jaswani, Aged About 36 Years R/o House No. 319, Gurunanak Nagar, Ward No. 24, Sindhi Colony, Durg, Tehsil And District Durg C.G. 2 - Nikhil Sinhani (Wrongly Mentioned As Singhni In Front Page Of Impugned Order) S/o Ashok Kumar Sinhani, Aged About 29 Years R/o Sadani Nagar, Sindhi Colony, Santrabadi, Durg, Tehsil And District Durg C.G. ... Applicants Versus * - State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. P.S. City Kotwali, Durg District Durg (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. B.P. Singh, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Kawal Jeet Singh Saini, Deputy Government Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 23/09/2026 1. The applicants have preferred this first bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 as they are in jail since 12.08.2026 in connection with Crime No. 440/2026 registered in Police Station – City Kotwali, Durg, District Durg (CG) for commission of offence punishable under Section 318(4) of BNS and Section 63 of Copy Right Act, 1957. 2. As per case of prosecution, complainant- Anil Malhotra, Field Officer, who was authorized to take legal action against the persons indulged Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.09.23 17:54:27 +0530 2 in purchase and sale products of Indian Tobacco Company (ITC) lodged an F.I.R. on 11.08.2026 making allegation that the present applicants were in possession of duplicate Gold Flake Cigarettes and thus caused loss to the Company. On such complaint, Police registered the offences under BNS and and Copy Right Act as stated above. 3. Mr. B.P. Singh, learned Advocate appearing for the applicants would submit that the applicant No. 1 is owner of SSD Traders, whereas applicant No. 2 is his employee. He would contend that seized 36 bundles of Cigarettes were purchased by the applicant No. 1 from authorized distributor and invoice has been placed along with this bail application. He would further contend that charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicants are in jail since 12.08.2026 and the applicants have no criminal antecedents. Thus, he would pray to allow the bail application. 4. On the other hand, Mr. Kawal Jeet Singh Saini, learned Deputy Government Advocate appearing for the State/non-applicant would oppose. He would submit that there is sufficient material to establish that the present applicants were involved in sale and purchase of duplicate Gold Flake Cigarettes and 36 bundles (18000 Cigarettes) were seized from the exclusive possession of the applicants, therefore, the bail application deserves to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Having considered the fact that the applicants are indulged in business of sale and purchase of Cigarettes etc, 36 bundles of Cigarettes were purchased by the applicant No. 1 from authorized distributor and invoice in this regard has been placed along with bail application; 3 further charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicants are in jail since 12.08.2026 and they have no criminal antecedents, I am inclined to release the applicants on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants is allowed. 7. It is directed that in the event of each of the applicants executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court, they shall be released on bail, on following conditions :- I. They 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/her from disclosing such fact to the Court; II. They shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial; III. They shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till the disposal of the trial; and, IV. They shall not involve themselves in any offence of a similar nature in future. 8. The observation made in the course of this order is only for considering the case of the applicants on the application for the grant of regular bail. The concerned trial Court shall not be influenced or bound by any observation made in the course of this order. 9. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti