[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Shambhu Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:13824
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
NAFR
Digitally
signed by
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 1396 of 2026
Shambhu Yadav S/o Late Shyam Lal Yadav Aged About 35 Years R/o
Near Ahiran River, Kasaniya, Thana Katghota, Tahsil Katghora, District
Korba, Chhattisgarh.
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Katghora, District Korba,
Chhattisgarh.
... Non-applicant(s)
For Applicant : Mr. Aakash Aahuja, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
23.03.2026
1.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the defect pointed
out by the Registry, regarding the non-filing of the correct certified
copy of the bail rejection order, has now been duly cured and the
correct certified copy has been filed along with a covering memo.
2. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section
483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of
regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.
04/2026, registered at Police Station : Katghora, District- Korba
(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(1), 34(2) and
59(a) of the C.G. Excise Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 04.01.2026, while
the police party of Police Station Katghora was on routine patrolling
duty, they received a credible information from an informant
regarding illegal possession of country-made mahua liquor. Acting
upon the said information, the police party immediately proceeded
to the spot i.e., Jatga Mod, Kasniya Road, where the accused was
found present. Upon search, a total of 30 liters of illicit/raw mahua
liquor was recovered from the possession of the accused in the
presence of independent witnesses. On being questioned, the
accused disclosed his name as Shambhu Yadav, S/o Late
Shyamlal Yadav. Thereafter, a notice under Section 94 of the
BNSS was served upon the accused, requiring him to produce valid
documents or license for possession of the said liquor, however, the
accused failed to produce any lawful authority. Consequently, the
seized liquor was confiscated in accordance with law and the
accused was arrested and sent to judicial custody under the
relevant provisions of the Excise Act. After completion of
investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent
Court.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has
been falsely implicated in this case and the said 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 further submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has filed
before the competent Court and the applicant is in jail since
04.01.2026 and the applicant had one criminal antecedent of the
year 2023, which has been disposed off by paying fine amount and
the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore,
he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant.
5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the prayer for
grant of bail to the applicant and submits that in the present case,
charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the
applicant has one previous criminal antecedent of the year 2023
and further the quantity of liquor seized from the possession of the
present applicant i.e. 30 liters of mahua liquor as such, he is not
entitled for grant of bail.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case-
diary.
7. 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 only one previous criminal antecedent
which has been mentioned in the bail application in para No. 4(a)
and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the
competent Court, further the quantity of liquor seized from the
possession of the applicant i.e. 30 liters of Mahua liquor and he is in
jail since 04.01.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take
some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the
present applicant.
8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed.
9. Let applicant, Shambhu Yadav, involved in Crime No. 04/2026,
registered at Police Station : Katghora, District- Korba (C.G.) for the
offence punishable under Section 34(1), 34(2) and 59(a) of the C.G.
Excise Act, be released on bail on furnishing 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.
10. 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
Kunal
