AJAY LIMBU vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010342922026 2026:CGHC:39061

NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No.8229 of 2026
Ajay Limbu S/o Mahesh Bahadur Aged About 26 Years R/o Ward
No.12 Laldadhipara Mahasamund, P.S. Mahasamund Tehsil And
District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh ... Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Mahasamund, District
Mahasamund Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Roshan Singh Lamba, Advocate
For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge
Order on Board
03.09.2026
1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’)
SISTLA
NEELIMA
VISHNU
PRIYA
for grant of regular bail to the Applicant who has been
Digitally signed by
SISTLA NEELIMA
VISHNU PRIYA
Date: 2026.09.05
10:55:43 +0530

2
arrested in connection with Crime No.340/2026 registered at
Police Station Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund, (C.G.)
for the offence under Section 34(2) of Excise Act.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 09.06.2026, Head
Constable Harish Kumar Kanwar of Police Station
Mahasamund received secret information that a person was
illegally selling liquor near the canal at Bhalsar Road, in the
vicinity of Shitli Nalah Liquor Shop, Mahasamund, pursuant to
which a raiding team was constituted and the accused was
apprehended at the spot and upon search, a small white-
coloured plastic bag containing 42 bottles of country-made
liquor, each of 180 ml, totalling 7,560 ml, was seized from his
possession, resulting in registration of the alleged offence.
Hence, the present bail application.
Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant
3.
is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present
case. It is submitted that no contraband has been seized
from the exclusive possession of the Applicant and as per the
charge-sheet, 7,560 ml of country-made liquor has allegedly
been recovered from him, which is only slightly above the
prescribed small quantity. It is further submitted that out of 10
witnesses, only has been examined, the Applicant is of tender
age, has no connection with the alleged crime and has been

3
falsely implicated due to malicious action on the part of the
police, which requires proper investigation. It is lastly
submitted that Applicant is in jail since 10.06.2026, the
charge-sheet has already been filed and the trial is likely to
take considerable time for its conclusion, therefore, the
Applicant may be released on bail.
4. Learned Counsel for the State opposes the bail application
and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed. It
is further submitted that the Applicant has three previous
criminal antecedents, out of which, in one crime under
Section 36(C) of the Excise Act, the Applicant has been
convicted and the fine amount has been paid, in another
crime under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, the Applicant has
been acquitted, while another crime under Section 34(2) of
the Excise Act is pending against him.
I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and
5.
perused the case diary carefully.
6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned Counsel
for the parties, the material available in the case diary, the
nature of allegations, the quantity of liquor allegedly seized,
the fact that the Applicant is in custody since 10.06.2026, the
charge-sheet has already been filed and out of 10

4
prosecution witnesses only one witness has so far been
examined, the trial is likely to take considerable time for its
conclusion and without further commenting anything upon the
merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that
it is a fit case to allow the application.
Accordingly, the bail application of the Applicant is allowed
7.
and it is directed that he be released on bail on his furnishing
a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in
the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court subject
to the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant/s shall file an undertaking to the
effect that he/they 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/s shall remain present before
the trial court on each date fixed, either
personally or through his/their counsel. In case
of his/their absence, without sufficient cause, the
trial court may proceed against him/them under
Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iii) In case, the applicant/s misuse/s the liberty
of bail during trial and in order to secure his/their
presence, proclamation under Section 84 of
BNSS. is issued and the applicant/s fail/s to
appear before the Court on the date fixed in
such proclamation, then, the trial court shall
initiate proceedings against him/them, in
accordance with law, under Section 209 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iv) The applicant/s shall remain present, in
person, before the trial court on the dates fixed

5
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/s 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/them in
accordance with law.
Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to
8.
the trial Court concerned for necessary information and
compliance forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal)
Judge
Priya