RAJESH SONKAR vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010293262026 2026:CGHC:38686
NAFR
MANPREET
KAUR
Digitally signed
by MANPREET
KAUR
Date: 2026.09.01
15:41:02 +0530
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 7450 of 2026
Rajesh Sonkar S/o Late Makhanlal Sonkar Aged About 42 Years R/o
Ward No.8 Bazarpara Charama, Tahsil- Charama, Distt- Uttar Baster
Kanker (C.G.)
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station
Charama Distt- Uttar Baster Kanker C.G.
... Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s) : Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Ritika Verma, 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.129/2026, registered at Police Station- Charama
Distt- Uttar Baster Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under
Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act.

2
2. That, as per the prosecution case, acting upon information that
the applicant Rajesh Sonkar had illegally stored liquor in his
chicken-cutting shop for sale, the police conducted a search and
allegedly recovered different varieties of country-made and
foreign liquor totaling about 10 litres and 260 ml, valued at
Rs.5,520, along with sale proceeds of Rs.600, which were seized
and taken into police custody.
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 19.06.2026, though the charge-sheet has been filed, but 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 24 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 24 criminal antecedents, but as of
now, he has already been acquitted in all the cases except one,
he is languishing in jail since 19.06.2026, charge-sheet has
already been filed 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, Rajesh Sonkar , involved in Crime No.129/2026,
registered at Police Station- Charama Distt- Uttar Baster Kanker
(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.

4
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail
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