[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Tejram Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 16 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:12526
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
GOURI MCRC No. 1428 of 2026
MUDALIAR
Tejram Yadav S/o Gopal Yadav Aged About 36 Years R/o Gram Kurrubhatha,
Digitally signed by
GOURI
MUDALIAR P.S.- Khallari, Tehsil Bagbahra, District Mahasamund (C.G.)
Date: 2026.03.17
15:18:00 +0530
... Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. Khallari,
Mahasamund (C.G.)
... Respondent
For Applicant : Shri Mayank Kumar, Advocate.
For : Smt. Smriti Shrivastava, PL.
Respondent/State
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
16/03/2026
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.03/2026 registered at Police Station Khallari for the offence
punishable under Section 34(2) of Chhattisgarh Excise Act.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 08.01.2026, during a visit to
Amakoni, Khamharia, Tusada, and Chhindauli, information was
received from an informant that a person was keeping illegal Mahua
liquor for sale in the Chhindauli forest village of Chhindauli. A raid was
conducted at the location indicated by the informant, where a person
was found in possession of three white plastic jerry cans, each
containing 10 liters of raw Mahua liquor produced in a hand-made
furnace, totaling 30 liters. When asked for his name, he informed as
Tejram Yadav. Upon being served a notice regarding the liquor, he
stated that he did not have any documents. Consequently, a case has
been registered and the applicant has been arrested for offences under
Section 34 (2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been
falsely implicated in this case and 30 bulk litres 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 applicant is in jail since 08/01/2026 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 antecedents. She further submits that 30 bulk litres 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, he is in
jail since 08/01/2026, applicant has no criminal antecedents, charge-
sheet has been filed and further the conclusion of the trial may take
some more time, therefore this Court is of the view that the applicant is
entitled to be released on bail in this case.
7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that the
applicant - Tejram Yadav, involved in Crime No.03/2026 registered at
Police Station Khallari for the offence punishable under Section 34(2)
of Chhattisgarh 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.
8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court
for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
- S Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
gouri
