GAURAV JAISWAL vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010426902026
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 10432 of 2026
Gaurav Jaiswal S/o Ramesh Jaiswal Aged About 33 Years R/o
Bhadwahi, P. S. Udaipur, Distt Surguja C. G.
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Divisional Flying Squad Excise Division,
Ambikapur, Distt Surguja C. G.

... Non-Applicant(s)
For Applicant : Mr. Vivekanand Samaddar, Advocate.
For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Priya Sharma, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Mr. Rakesh Mohan Pandey, Judge
Order on Board
03/11/2026
1. 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. 59/2026, registered at Police
Station : Divisional Flying Squad Excise Division, Ambikapur,
District- Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under

2
Sections 34(1)(A), 34(2), 36 and 59(A) of the C.G. Excise Act.
The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 05.08.2026, the officials
2.
of the Divisional Flying Squad, Excise Division, Ambikapur,
received secret information that the present applicant, Gaurav
Jaiswal, had illegally stored a huge quantity of liquor
manufactured in Madhya Pradesh at the house of co-accused
Brijlal Paikra situated at village Nunera. Acting upon the said
information, the officials conducted a search at the house of co-
accused Brijlal Paikra and seized 18 cartons containing 900
quarters of Goa Whisky, each measuring 180 ml, having a total
quantity of 162 litres. On the basis of the aforesaid seizure and
allegations against the applicant, the present offence was
registered. The applicant was arrested on 05.08.2026 and, after
completion of the investigation, charge-sheet has been filed
before the competent Court.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant
is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case.
He would further submit that the applicant has neither committed
nor participated in the alleged offence and no recovery has been
made from his possession. The alleged recovery has been made
from the house of co-accused Brijlal Paikra. He would further
submit that the co-accused has already been granted bail by this
Court in MCRC No. 9836 of 2026 vide order dated 15.10.2026
and the case of the present applicant is similar to that of the said

3
co-accused. So far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant
are concerned, he has three criminal antecedents, out of which
two relate to offences under the Excise Act and one is preventive
in nature, however, all three cases have already been disposed
of, as disclosed in Part-D of the bail application. He would further
submit that charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicant is
in judicial custody since 05.08.2026 and the trial is likely to take
considerable time to conclude. Therefore, he prays for grant of
regular bail to the applicant.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the
prayer for grant of bail and submit that the charge-sheet has
already been filed before the competent Court. She would further
submit that the applicant has three criminal antecedents, out of
which two relate to offences under the Excise Act and one is
preventive in nature. She would also submit that 162 litres of
liquor manufactured in Madhya Pradesh were seized from the
house of co-accused Brijlal Paikra, which was allegedly stored at
the instance of the present applicant. Therefore, the applicant is
not entitled to be released on bail.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
5.
diary.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case,
6.
nature and gravity of allegations levelled against the applicant, the
fact that the alleged liquor was seized from the house of co-

4
accused Brijlal Paikra and further considering that the applicant
has three criminal antecedents, all of which have already been
disposed of, as disclosed in Part-D of the bail application, charge-
sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and the
applicant is in judicial custody since 05.08.2026. This Court also
takes note of the fact that the co-accused has already been
granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 9836 of 2026 vide order
dated 15.10.2026. In view of the aforesaid facts and
circumstances, thsu without further commenting upon the merits
of the case, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the applicant.
7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed . It
is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a
personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the
like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he
shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-
(i) he shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the
Court;
(ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be
prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, &

5
(iii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each
and every date given to him by the said Court till
disposal of the trial.
- S/- Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
Judge
Kunal