1 2026:CGHC:12675 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2421 of 2026 1 - Smt. Nandbai Navratna W/o Sanjay Kumar Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Baglota Thana Bilaigarh District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (CG) 2 - Smt. Rohani Bai W/o Dhurva Navratna Aged About 53 Years R/o Village Baglota Thana Bilaigarh District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (CG) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House O昀케cer Police Station Bilaigarh District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (CG) ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicants : Mr. Pramod Kumar Navratna, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Shubham Bajpai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 17/03/2026 1. This is the 昀椀rst bail application 昀椀led under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 04/2026 registered at Police Station- Bilaigarh, District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.), for the o昀昀ence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 03.01.2026, acting upon information received from an informant, the police of Police Station KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Bilaigarh seized a total of 111.750 bulk litres of Mahua liquor from the shed (parchi) located behind the house of the applicants, in the presence of witnesses, which is a substantial quantity. A further perusal of the seizure memo reveals that 66 bulk litres of illicit liquor were seized from applicant Nandbai Navratna and 45.700 bulk litres of illicit liquor were seized from applicant Rohini Bai Navratna. Based upon such, the police have registered a case under Section 34(2) of the CG Excise Act against the applicants. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case, they have no nexus with the incident narrated by the prosecution. He further submits that the present applicants are not in possession of any illicit liquor nor they had kept the same. He further submits that under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years and the applicants have no previous criminal antecedents and in the present case, charge-sheet has been 昀椀led before the competent Court and the applicants are in jail since 03.01.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer, 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 and so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicants are concerned, the applicants have no criminal antecedents further the quantity of liquor seized from the joint possession of the applicants i.e. 111.750 bulk liters of liquor. Accordingly, the present applicants 3 are not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing 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 applicants and the fact that in the present case, charge-sheet has been 昀椀led before the competent Court and the applicants have no criminal antecedents further the quantity of liquor seized from the joint possession of the applicants i.e. 111.750 bulk liters of liquor and further they are in jail since 03.01.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicants. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants is allowed. 8. Let the applicants – Smt. Nandbai Navratna and Smt. Rohani Bai, involved in Crime No. 04/2026 registered at Police Station- Bilaigarh, District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.), for the o昀昀ence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each, in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall 昀椀le an undertaking to the e昀昀ect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 昀椀xed 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. 4 (ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date 昀椀xed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without su昀케cient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date 昀椀xed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates 昀椀xed 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 applicants are deliberated or without su昀케cient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law. 9. O昀케ce is directed to send a certi昀椀ed copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. dorthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal