YOGESH KASHYAP vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010311662026 2026:CGHC:38685
NAFR
MANPREET
KAUR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally signed
by MANPREET
KAUR
Date: 2026.09.01
15:41:01 +0530
MCRC No. 7519 of 2026
Yogesh Kashyap S/o Dilip Kashyap Aged About 32 Years R/o Ward No.
07, Near Ram Mandir, Chikhalapasa, Police Station Dallirajhara, District
Balod C. G.
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Dallirajhara, District Balod
C. G.
... Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s) : Mr. Hemant Gupta, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
01.09.2026
1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under
Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS)
for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection
with Crime No.147/2026, registered at Police Station- Rajhara,
District- Balod (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section
34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act.

2
2. That, as per the prosecution case, on 01-07-2026, upon receiving
secret information that the applicant was proceeding towards his
house through the vegetable market carrying a huge quantity of
illicit liquor, the police intercepted him and allegedly seized 7.50
bulk litres of country-made liquor from his possession.
Consequently, Crime No. 147/2026 was registered at Police
Station Rajhara for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of
the Excise Act.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that
the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this
case. He further submits that the applicant is languishing in jail
since 01.07.2026 and the trial is likely to take some time for its
conclusion. He later submits that so far as criminal antecedents of
the applicant is concerned, though the applicant has 4 criminal
antecedents, but only one is pending amongst them. He lastly
submits that under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act,
minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is
three years, therefore, he prays grant of bail.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes
the bail application of the applicant and also the submissions
advanced by learned counsel for the applicant .
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
6.
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,

3
nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and
the fact that the applicant has 4 criminal antecedents, but as of
now, only one is pending against him, he is languishing in jail
since 01.07.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some
time, as such, the Court is of the opinion that the applicant is
entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the bail application of the
applicant is allowed .
7.
Let applicant, Yogesh Kashyap , involved in Crime No.147/2026,
registered at Police Station- Rajhara, District- Balod (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:-
(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
them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail

4
during trial and in order to secure his presence
proclamation under Section 84 of Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita 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 Section 209 of 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information and compliance.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Manpreet