Gulapi Bariha vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2026 Latest Caselaw 394 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Gulapi Bariha vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 12 March, 2026

Author: Ramesh Sinha

Bench: Ramesh Sinha

                                                         1




                                                                    2026:CGHC:11967
                                                                                       NAFR

                              HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR


                                             MCRC No. 2322 of 2026

                     Gulapi Bariha S/o Pratibodh Bariha Aged About 40 Years R/o Village-
                     Dongarraksha Police Station Singhoda Distt- Mahasamund (C.G.)
                                                                             ... Applicant(s)

         Digitally
AKHILESH signed by
KUMAR    AKHILESH



                                                      versus
DEWANGAN KUMAR
         DEWANGAN




                     State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station-
                     Singhoda, District- Mahasamund (C.G.)
                                                                           ... Respondent(s)

For Applicant(s) : Mr. Gurudev I. Sharan, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 12/03/2026

1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for

grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in

connection with Crime No. 93/2025 registered at Police Station

Singhoda, District- Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offence

punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 21.12.2025 the

applicant was found in possession of 72 liters of Mahua liquor,

kept in his house, which led to the registration of alleged offence

against the applicant and subsequently, the applicant was

arrested. Hence, the bail application.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has

been falsely implicated in this case and 72 bulk liters of Mahua

liquor was not seized from the exclusive possession of the

applicant. 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. He also submits that the applicant has

no criminal antecedent, the applicant is in jail since 21.12.2025

and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time.

Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant.

4. Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant would oppose the bail

application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the

present case before the competent Court and the applicant has no

criminal antecedent. She further submits that 72 bulk liters of

Mahua liquor was recovered from the possession of the applicant,

therefore, he is 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 applicant and

the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent, he is in jail

since 21.12.2025 and the charge-sheet has been filed in the

present case, further the conclusion of the trial may take some

more time, as such, this Court is of the view that the applicant is

entitled to be released on bail in this case.

7. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

8. Let the applicant - Gulapi Bariha, involved in Crime No. 93/2025

registered at Police Station Singhoda, District- Mahasamund

(C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G.

Excise Act, 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 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.

9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial

Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith.

                  -                                            Sd/-
                                                        (Ramesh Sinha)
                                                          Chief Justice




Akhil