1 2026:CGHC:16185 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1232 of 2026 Muneshwar Yadav S/o Ramprashad Yadav Aged About 38 Years R/o Village- Udaipur Police Station And Tehsil- Udaipur, District- Surguja Chhattisgarh, ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Udaipur, District- Surguja Chhattisgarh, ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Sanjay Pathak, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 08.04.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 03/2026, registered at Police Station : Udaipur, District- Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. As per the prosecution case, on 04.01.2026, the police party received credible information from a reliable source that KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 accused/applicant- Muneshwar Yadav was illegally transporting English liquor for the purpose of sale in a Jello vehicle bearing registration No. OR-02-BL-7117 from Lakhanpur towards Udaipur, acting upon the said information, the police immediately proceeded and intercepted the said vehicle near Mrigadand Mod and upon search conducted in accordance with law after preparing a panchnama, 22 bottles of Jammu Special Whisky (180 ml each) and 08 bottles of Royal Stag Deluxe Whisky (375 ml each) were recovered from the possession of the accused/applicant, upon being questioned and served with notice under Section 94 of the BNSS, the accused/applicant failed to produce any valid licence or permit for carrying the alleged liquor, whereupon the recovered liquor along with the vehicle was seized and taken into possession in accordance with law, the accused/applicant was arrested and thereafter remanded to judicial custody for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, during the course of investigation, samples of the seized liquor were sent for chemical examination and the report thereof was duly received and upon completion of investigation, the police filed charge-sheet before the competent Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and the said liquor was not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant. It is further argued by him that under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years. He further submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has 3 filed before the competent Court and the applicant is in jail since 04.01.2026 and so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, the applicant has a total of nine criminal antecedents, out of which seven cases are under Istaghasa, one case pertains to the BNS and another relates to the Motor Vehicles Act, all of which have been duly explained in paragraph No. 4(A) of the bail application and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, the applicant has a total of nine criminal antecedents, all of which have been duly explained in paragraph No. 4(A) of the bail application. She further submits that from the possession of the present applicant total 6.960 bulk liters of liquor was seized and as such he is a habitual offender therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the applicant has a total of nine criminal antecedents, out of which seven cases are under Istaghasa, one case pertains to the BNS and another relates to the Motor Vehicles Act, all of which have been duly explained in paragraph No. 4(A) of the bail 4 application and also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the quantity of liquor seized from the possession of the applicant i.e. 6.960 bulk liters of liquor and he is in jail since 04.01.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 8. Let applicant, Muneshwar Yadav, involved in Crime No. 03/2026, registered at Police Station : Udaipur, District- Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, 5 proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal