[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Lipika Mirdha vs The State Of Chhattisgarh on 18 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:12946
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2566 of 2026
1 - Lipika Mirdha W/o Shri Arun Mirdha Aged About 40 Years R/o Village - P.V.
-60 Yashwant Nagar Thana And Tahsil- Pakhanjur Distt- North Baster Kanker
(C.G.)
2 - Sukhbeer Vishwas S/o Late Shri Karan Vishwas Aged About 42 Years R/o
Village- P-V-60 Yashwant Nagar Thana And Tahsil- Pakhanjur Distt- North
Baster Kanker (C.G.)
... Applicants
versus
The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Of Police Station
Pakhanjur, District - North Baster Kanker (C.G.)
Non-applicant
For Applicants : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate.
Digitally
RAJSHEKHAR signed by
SONI RAJSHEKHAR
SONI
For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
18.03.2026
1.
The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section
483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of
regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.
21/2026, registered at Police Station - Pakhanjur, District - North
Baster Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of
C.G. Excise Act.
2. The case of the prosecution, is that the Police of Police Station -
Pakhanjur, District - North Baster Kanker (C.G.) has received a secret
information through the informant and on the basis of such information
the Police has seized a total of 60 liters of Mahua liquor from the
possession of the applicants. Thereafter, the applicant has been
arrested by the Police and the offence was registered.
3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicants
are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case and there is
no criminal antecedents registered against the present applicants. It is
further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. He
further submits that under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, minimum
punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years. The
applicants are in jail since 22.01.2026 and trial is likely to take some
time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail.
4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail
application and submits that there is no criminal antecedents registered
against the present applicants, and the charge-sheet has been filed in
this case. It is further submitted that a total of 60 liters of Mahua liquor
has been seized from the possession of the present applicants,
therefore, they are not entitled for grant of bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the
documents available on record.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,
nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicants and the
fact that there is no criminal antecedents registered against the present
applicants, charge-sheet has been filed against the applicants and they
are in jail since 22.01.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take
some time, I am inclined to allow this application.
7. Let applicants, Lipika Mirdha and Sukhbeer Vishwas, involved in
Crime No. 21/2026, registered at Police Station - Pakhanjur, District -
North Baster Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section
34(2) of C.G. Excise Act, be released on bail on their 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
concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Rajshekhar
