[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Raja Tandi vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 10 April, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:16629
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 3253 of 2026
Raja Tandi S/o Vijay Tandi Aged About 22 Years R/o Brahma Dev Nagar
Labhandi Behind Badhte Kadam P.S. Telibandha, District Raipur,
Chattisgarh. ... Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Telibandha, District Raipur,
Chhattisgarh. ...Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Ashish Gangwani, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
VAIBHAV
SINGH
Digitally signed
by VAIBHAV
Order on Board
SINGH
Date: 2026.04.10
16:06:46 +0530
10.04.2026
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.
52/2026 registered at Police Station - Telibandha, District - Raipur
(C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G.
Excise Act.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on the basis of information
received dated 07.02.2026 from informant the police has allegedly
recovered 5.400 Bulk liters liquor from illegal possession of the
applicant Accordingly the Offence Under Section 34(2) of Chhattisgarh
Excise Act have been registered and the applicant has been arrested.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is
further submitted that there is not even an iota of evidence to show his
involvement in the same. The applicant is in judicial custody since
07.02.2026 and the charge-sheet has already been filed. He is the
sole earning member of his family and, due to his continued
incarceration, the entire family is facing great hardship. It is further
submitted that a false seizure memo has been prepared only to
implicate the applicant in the present case. The alleged liquor has not
been recovered from the exclusive possession of the applicant and
there is no direct evidence against him; even the circumstantial
evidence is not sufficient to connect him with the alleged offence. The
offences alleged are triable by the Magistrate and are neither
punishable with death nor with imprisonment for life, the minimum
punishment being one year and the maximum punishment being three
years. Since the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable
time, continued detention of the applicant would amount to pre-trial
punishment. The applicant also reserves his right to raise any other
relevant grounds at the time of final hearing.
4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application
of the present applicant and submits that the applicant has one
previous criminal antecedent, therefore, he is not entitled to the grant
of regular bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the
nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the applicant, and
further taking into account the period of detention, as the applicant
has remained in judicial custody since 07.02.2026, and the fact that
the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court,
and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time,
this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant.
7. Let the Applicant - Raja Tandi involved in Crime No. 52/2026
registered at Police Station - Telibandha, District - Raipur (C.G.), for
the offences punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act,
be released on bail on his 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 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 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.
8. 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
Vaibhav
