BALRAM DANGI vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010288582026 2026:CGHC:38399
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 6767 of 2026
Balram Dangi S/o Late Diwan Singh Dangi, Aged About 52 Years
Resident Of Kirshna Niwash Apartment Flat No. 301 Koradi Road,
(Maharashtra)
... Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
Manpur, District Mohla-Manpur - Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.)
... Non-Applicant
For Applicant : Shri Aditya Bhardwaj, Advocate.
For Non-Applicant : Miss Samiksha Gupta,PL.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice
Order on Board
31/08/2026
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.37/2026 registered at Police Station Manpur, District Mohla-
Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) for the offence under Section
34 (2) & 59-A of the CG Excise Act and under Section 3(5) of the
Digitally
signed by
KRISHNA
KUMAR
BARVE
Date:
2026.09.01
10:45:59
+0530
KRISHNA
KUMAR
BARVE

2
BNS.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the applicant was
transporting a large consignment of Royal Stag, Goa Whisky,
Kingfisher can beer and Powerful can beer, loaded from Multai
Tehsil, District Betul (Madhya Pradesh), in vehicle bearing
registration No.CG-15-DZ-4515 (Ashok Leyland), via Devri,
Chichola, Rajnandgaon, Dongargaon, Ambagarh Chowki, Mohla,
Manpur, and onward via Aundhi towards the Maharashtra border,
without any valid permit or documents. The said vehicle and its
contents were intercepted and seized before witnesses. On
search, the following quantity of liquor was allegedly recovered
from the possession of the applicant: Royal Stag English Whisky
98 boxes and 32 pouches; Goa Whisky 397 boxes and 18
pouches; Strong Can Beer 95 boxes and 17 cans; Kingfisher
Strong Can Beer 199 boxes and 21 cans; aggregating to
79,75,720 ml, valued at approximately ₹50,89,125/-.
Consequently, Crime No. 37/2026 was registered at Police Station
Manpur under Sections 34(2), 59-A of the Chhattisgarh Excise
Act, 1915 and Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023,
and the matter is presently under investigation. Hence the bail
application.
3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the
applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime.
Section 59-A of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915 restricts the
entertaining of applications for anticipatory bail in respect of

3
offences under Section 34(1)(a)/(b) where the quantity of liquor
exceeds five bulk litres; the present application is one for
regular/post-arrest bail under Section 483 BNSS, to which the
restriction under Section 59-A has no application, and the
impugned order does not record any statutory bar to the grant of
regular bail. The seizure, if any, already stands effected and
documented by the prosecution, and the entire case property is in
official custody; nothing further remains to be recovered from the
applicant, rendering his continued custodial detention
unnecessary for the purposes of investigation. The investigation is
stated to be underway and the chargesheet is yet to be filed; the
trial, once it commences, is expected to be protracted, during
which period the applicant cannot be made to suffer incarceration
as an under trial. The offence alleged against the applicant is an
economic/excise offence not involving any allegation of violence
or threat to life. Mere gravity or quantum of the seized article
cannot, by itself and without more, be a ground to deny bail once
the seizure has already been effected and documented, and the
applicant is not shown to be a habitual offender. The applicant
does not have any criminal antecedent. The applicant is in jail
since 7.6.2026. Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non-
applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the
applicant has one criminal antecedent under the Arms Act, and

4
the charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant.
Therefore, the bail application may be rejected.
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,
and the fact that the charge sheet has already been submitted
against the applicant, the applicant has only one criminal
antecedent under the Arms Act, the applicant is in jail since
7.6.2026 and conclusion of trial is likely to take some time, this
Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on
bail in the present case. Accordingly, the Application is allowed .
7. Let the Applicant – Balram Dangi, involved in Crime No.37/2026
registered at Police Station Manpur, District Mohla-Manpur-
Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) for the offence under Section 34 (2) &
59-A of the CG Excise Act and under Section 3(5) of the BNS, be
released on bail on 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

5
law.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the
trial court on each date fixed, either personally or
through their counsel. In case of his absence,
without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed
against them 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
applicants are 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 them in accordance with law.

6
8. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall
make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously
as possible within a period of 6 months from the date of receipt of
a certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no
legal impediment.
9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information and compliance.
-

Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Barve