1 2026:CGHC:6329 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1212 of 2026 Tiku Nishad S/o Shri Sukhdev Nishad, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Joratarai, Police Station Somani, Tahsil And District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Somani, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Raman Patel, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 04.02.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 272/2025, registered at Police Station Somani, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G) for the o昀昀ence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, on 07.12.2025, the police o昀케cers of the concerned Police Station, while on patrolling duty, received secret information from an informant alleging that the applicant had stored liquor in his courtyard. Acting upon the said information, the police conducted a search and allegedly seized 5.400 bulk litres of foreign and country-made ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.02.05 12:55:59 +0530 2 liquor kept in plastic bags, and on the basis of suspicion, arrested the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and that no seizure has been made from his exclusive possession. He further submits that although the applicant has 08 criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, he has already been acquitted in 04 of those cases. He also submits that under Sections 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years and the applicant has been in jail since 07.12.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case charge-sheet has been 昀椀led before the competent Court. She submits that the present applicant has 08 criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, which shows that the present applicant is a habitual o昀昀ender. As such, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case also considering the fact that the applicant has 08 criminal antecedents of the similar nature, shows that the present applicant is a habitual o昀昀ender and also in light of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, reported in (2022) 8 SCC 559, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court had cancelled the bail granted to the accused therein on the ground that the accused had previous antecedents, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a 昀椀t case to enlarge 3 the applicant on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Tiku Nishad, involved in Crime No. 272/2025, registered at Police Station Somani, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G) for the o昀昀ence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, is rejected. 7. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 8. O昀케ce is directed to send a certi昀椀ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek