Durg Chhattisgarh v. The State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Of
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:21425 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3087 of 2025 Ashish @ Chhote S/o Late Shri Miltan David Aged About 46 Years R/o Quarter No. 12/F, Street No. 29, Sector-05 Bhilai Nagar, P.S. Bhilainagar, Tahsil And District - Durg Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus The State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station - Nandini Nagar, District - Durg Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Sumit Shrivastava, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08.05.2025 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. 145/2021 registered at Police Station Nandini Nagar, District Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act against the present applicant. 2. The prosecution's story is that on 20.04.2025, police ofÏcers from ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.05.09 20:30:35 +0530 2 P.S. Nandini Nagar, District Durg, received secret information from an informant. The informant alleged that accused persons were transporting liquor in an Innova car (CG-07-AK-8106) for sale. A search team was formed, and during a search at Pathariya Tiraha Dhamdha Durg Road, 1248 quarters of liquor (equivalent to 224.640 bulk liters) were found. The co-accused were arrested, and their memorandum statements were recorded, implicating the applicant in the offence. The police filed a charge-sheet against the co-accused, listing the applicant as absconding. On 18.03.2025, the applicant was arrested, and a supplementary charge-sheet was filed. 3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and the said 224.640 bulk liters of liquor were not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant. It is further argued by him that the incident was taken place on 20.04.2021 and the alleged liquor was seized from the co-accused persons and the liquor as well as vehicle did not belong to applicant but all of sudden his name has been added though the applicant did not have any concern with the said liquor. He further submits that the co-accused person, namely, Kailash Pal, Vijendra Kumar Pandey @ Buntry and Manish Kumar Lehre in MCRC No. 5314 of 2021, MCRC No. 6377 of 2021 and MCRC No. 5885 of 2021 vide orders dated 09.09.2021, 27.09.2021 and 11.08.2021 have already been granted regular bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. He also submits that the present applicant has 05 criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, Arms 3 Act and IPC prior to the year 2020 and all the cases have already
Decision
been disposed of, in support of his contention he has annexed an afÏdavit with the present bail application. He also submits that the applicant is in jail since 18.03.2025, 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 counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that a charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent court. It is argued that 224.640 bulk liters of liquor were found in the possession of the co- accused persons, and based on their memorandum statements, the applicant has been implicated, indicating that this is an organized crime, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of regular 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 present applicant and the fact that the co-accused person, namely, Kailash Pal, Vijendra Kumar Pandey @ Buntry and Manish Kumar Lehre in MCRC No. 5314 of 2021, MCRC No. 6377 of 2021 and MCRC No. 5885 of 2021 vide orders dated 09.09.2021, 27.09.2021 and 11.08.2021 have already been granted regular bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, further, the present applicant has 05 criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, Arms Act and IPC prior to the year 2020 and all the cases have already been disposed of, in support of his contention he has annexed an afÏdavit with the 4 present bail application, moreover, the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 18.03.2025 and conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the applicant – Ashish @ Chhote, involved in Crime No. 145/2021 registered at Police Station Nandini Nagar, District Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act against the present applicant, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 sufÏcient 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 5 and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against his, 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 sufÏcient 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. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Abhishek Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice