1 2026:CGHC:16630 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3252 of 2026 Vinod Tiwari S/o Rameshwar Tiwari Aged About 40 Years R/o Jora Para, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Dindayal Nagar, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Aishwary Diwan, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10.04.2026 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. 80/2026 registered at Police Station – Dindayal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.04.10 16:06:45 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that 03.02.2026 on the basis of information received from informant that one person is selling ill-legal liquor near Agroha Colony police conducted a raid and found the person wearing brown colour full sleeve shirt and a black colour lower having liqueur police caught a person and seized 56 small bottles of country made liqueur 180 ML each in total 10 ltr 080 ml (10.080 ltr) value of Rupees 5600/- from the applicant. On the basis of aforesaid story, offence under section 34 (2) of C.G. Excise Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant has only one previous criminal antecedent in Crime No. 68/2026 registered at Police Station Deendayal Nagar under Section 34(1) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, which has already been disposed of. The learned Trial Court also failed to appreciate that the ingredients of Section 34(2) of the said Act are not attracted from the entire prosecution story and, therefore, the offence under Section 34(2) is not made out against the applicant. The applicant reserves his right to raise additional grounds and file further documents at the time of arguments. The applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title of the bail application, where his movable and immovable properties are situated, and therefore there is no likelihood of his absconding. The applicant is ready and willing to furnish adequate surety and to abide by all the directions and conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application 3 of the present applicant and submits that the applicant has one previous criminal antecedent, therefore, he is not entitled to the grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the applicant, and further taking into account the period of detention, as the applicant has remained in judicial custody since 03.02.2026, and the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant. 7. Let the Applicant – Vinod Tiwari, involved in Crime No. 80/2026 registered at Police Station – Dindayal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two local 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 his 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, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and 4 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. 8. 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 Vaibhav