[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Mohan Prasad Gupta vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 7 April, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:15856
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 3077 of 2026
Mohan Prasad Gupta S/o Baijnath Sao Aged About 77 Years Resident Of
Harharguttu Road Jamshedpur, Thana- Bagbeda, District- Purbi-
Singbhum (Jharkhand)
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station-
Bodla, District- Kabirdham (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Shailendra Dubey, Advocate along with
Ms. Anjali Pradhan, Advocate
For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Anusha Naik, Deputy Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
07.04.2026
1.
Mr. Shailendra Dubey, learned counsel submits that he has filed
memo of appearance today before the Registry and prays that he
may be permitted to argue the matter on behalf of the applicant.
2. Prayer made by Mr. Shailendra Dubey, Advocate, is allowed.
3. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section
483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of
RAHUL
DEWANGAN
regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.
Digitally
signed by
RAHUL
DEWANGAN
199/2025, registered at Police Station Bodla, District- Kabirdham,
(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(1)(B), 34(2),
35, 49(A) and 59(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act and under
Sections 318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 340(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
4. The case of the prosecution, in brief, it is alleged that on receipt of
credible information, the Station House Officer came to know that
one Nandkumar of Village Pondi, along with his associates, was
engaged in the manufacturing of illicit liquor within his residential
premises, acting upon such information, a panchnama
(memorandum) was prepared and a police team proceeded to the
said location as indicated by the informant and cordoned off the
house, whereupon Nandkumar Kurre, Islam alias Saddu Khan,
Sheikh Sajid and Chhotu alias Dinesh Chandravanshi were found
present, and upon inquiry, they allegedly admitted to the illicit
activity, thereafter, upon conducting personal search and search of
the premises, 49 pauwa (180 ml each) of illicit country-made liquor
(plain), totaling approximately 8.82 bulk liters of a white-colored
liquid, were recovered from their joint possession, along with
various articles used in the manufacture and packaging of such
illicit liquor, including 42 jerrycans of 25 liters capacity, one water
jar, six bundles of stickers labeled "Romeo Desi Plain Liquor" (each
containing 500 stickers), eight sheets of hologram stickers, one
cap-sealing punching machine, seven sacks of empty bottles, a
plastic sack containing tin caps marked "Bhatiya Wine Merchants
Pvt. Ltd., Mungeli, Chhattisgarh Excise," two water jars fitted with
taps, one blue drum, a color printer, five touchscreen mobile phones
and two keypad mobile phones, all of which were seized, the said
accused persons were arrested and produced before the remand
Court, and during the course of investigation, it was further revealed
that in furtherance of the alleged illegal activity, they had been in
contact with the present applicant Mohan Sao and one Rakesh
Kohli, residents of Jamshedpur (Tatanagar), who, being known to
Sheikh Sajid, had allegedly supplied the chemicals, stickers, bottle
caps and cap-sealing machine used in the preparation of counterfeit
liquor, and on the basis of the aforesaid, the present crime has been
registered at Police Station Bodla, District Kabirdham, bearing
Crime No. 199/2025, under the relevant provisions of law.
5. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the
applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case.
He submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents
He further submits that under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act,
minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three
years. He further submits that similarly situated co-accused person,
namely, Rakesh Kohli has already been granted bail by this Court in
MCRC No. 3014/2026 vide order dated 06.04.2026 and and the
case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused.
He also submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the
competent Court, and the applicant is in jail since 30.11.2025 and
the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he
prays grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of parity.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail
application of the applicant but could not dispute the fact that co-
accused has already been granted bail by this Court and the case of
the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case-
diary.
8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,
nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and
the fact that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents,
further considering the fact that similarly situated co-accused
person, namely, Rakesh Kohli has already been granted bail by this
Court in MCRC No. 3014/2026 vide order dated 06.04.2026 and
and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-
accused, further the charge-sheet has been filed before the
competent Court and he is in jail since 30.11.2025 and conclusion
of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to
grant regular bail to the present applicant on the ground of parity.
9. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the
applicant, Mohan Prasad Gupta, involved in Crime No. 199/2025,
registered at Police Station Bodla, District- Kabirdham, (C.G.) for
the offence punishable under Sections 34(1)(B), 34(2), 35, 49(A)
and 59(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act and under Sections
318(4), 336(2), 336(3), 340(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on 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 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.
10. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information and compliance
forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Rahul Dewangan
