1 2026:CGHC:20521 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2982 of 2026 Sahadev Lahare S/o Shri Premsagar Lahare Aged About 35 Years R/o Vill.- Pachari, P.S.- Patewa, Tehsil- Mahasamund And Distt.- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Patewa Distt.- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Anway Tiwari, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 01.05.2026 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. 38/2026, registered at Police Station : Patewa, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the Police of Police Station Patewa, District- Mahasamund (C.G.), received a secret information from the informant that applicant has kept some liquor KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 for selling purposes, on the basis of such information, the concerned Police officials reached on the spot, conducted raid and have seized 20 bulk liters of country made liquor plain from the possession of the applicant. Thereafter, Police has registered an offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act against the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the applicant had two previous criminal antecedents under the Excise Act in which now he has been acquitted and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. He further submit that submits that under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years and the applicant is in jail since 28.02.2026 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the applicant had two previous criminal antecedents under the Excise Act now in which he has been acquitted, further the quantity of liquor seized from the possession of the present applicant i.e. 20 bulk liters of country made liquor plain therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 3 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 had two previous criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, now in which he has been acquitted and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court further the quantity of liquor seized from the possession of the applicant i.e. 20 bulk liters of country made plain liquor and he is in jail since 28.02.2026 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, Sahadev Lahare, involved in Crime No. 38/2026, registered at Police Station : Patewa, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 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 4 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, 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