1 CGHC010394992026 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9497 of 2026 1 - Dilip Kurre S/o Ramlal Kurre Aged About 50 Years R/o Vill-Amodi P.S. Kharora, Distt- Raipur (C.G.) ...Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Arang, Distt- Raipur (C.G.) --- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anchal Kumar Matre, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Akash Agrawal, PL Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 08.10.2026 1) The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.436/2026 registered at Police Station Arang, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915. 2) The prosecution case, in brief, is that on the basis of secret information received through an informant, the police of Police Station Arang allegedly recovered 28.8 bulk litre of country-made liquor from the possession of the applicant, which was being carried in an Ertiga car REKHA SINGH Digitally signed by REKHA SINGH DN: cn=REKHA SINGH, ou=HIGH COURT, o=HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN Date: 2026.10.08 14:21:11 +0530 2 bearing registration No. CG 04 QB 5200. Accordingly, the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act was registered and the applicant was arrested. 3) Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant case. He would further submit that the alleged liquor was not recovered from the exclusive possession of the present applicant. He would contend that the applicant is in jail since 14.09.2026 and the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. He would further submit that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time. It is also submitted that similarly situated co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. No. 9410/2026 vide order dated 06.10.2026 and, therefore, on the ground of parity also, the present applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 4) On the other hand, learned State counsel, appearing for the State/non- applicant, opposes the bail application. However, he could not dispute the fact that similarly situated co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. No. 9410/2026 vide order dated 06.10.2026. 5) I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6) Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 14.09.2026 and similarly situated co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. No. 9410/2026 vide order dated 06.10.2026 and the case of the present applicant is similar to that of said co-accused thus, without further commenting anything on merits, I 3 am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7) It is directed that in the event of the applicant 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, he shall be released on bail on 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. The observation made hereinabove is for the purpose of deciding this bail application only, the learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Rekha