Chhattisgarh High Court

Absence of criminal history and filing of charge-sheet justify grant of bail in excise offenses.

DAYANIDHI SAV vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High CourtJUDGMENT: March 16, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The applicant, Dayanidhi Sav, was arrested on December 20, 2025, in connection with Crime No. 337/2025 registered at Police Station Pusour, District Raigarh

Source reference: para. 1, 3

The prosecution alleged that following a raid based on informant data, 30 bulk liters of country-made liquor were seized from the applicant’s possession

Source reference: para. 2

Consequently, the applicant was charged under Sections 34(2) and 56(A) of the C.G. Excise Act

Source reference: para. 2

The applicant filed this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, arguing he was falsely implicated and highlighting his lack of criminal antecedents

Source reference: para. 1, 3
02

Issues

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, considering the nature of the offence and the duration of his pretrial detention

Source reference: para. 1, 6
03

Law Applied

The court applied Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which provides the High Court with the power to grant bail

Source reference: para. 1

Substantively, the case involved Sections 34(2) and 56(A) of the C.G. Excise Act, which prescribe a minimum punishment of one year and a maximum of three years for the unlawful possession of liquor

Source reference: para. 3

The court also invoked procedural and penal safeguards under Sections 84, 209, 269, and 351 of the BNSS and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) to ensure the applicant’s compliance with bail conditions

Source reference: para. 7
04

Reasoning

The court evaluated the facts and circumstances by balancing the gravity of the allegations against the applicant's personal liberty. It specifically noted that the applicant had no prior criminal record

Source reference: para. 3, 6

Furthermore, the court observed that the charge-sheet had already been filed before the competent court, and the applicant had been incarcerated since December 20, 2025

Source reference: para. 6

Given that the maximum punishment for the offence is three years and the trial was expected to take considerable time to conclude, the court reasoned that continued detention was not warranted

Source reference: para. 3, 6

The court addressed the State's opposition regarding the quantity of liquor by imposing stringent conditions to ensure the applicant does not misuse his liberty or delay the trial process

Source reference: para. 4, 7
05

Holding

The High Court allowed the bail application and ordered the release of the applicant upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties

The holding was subject to several conditions: the applicant must not seek adjournments when witnesses are present, must appear personally for framing of charges and recording of statements, and must comply with all trial court dates. Failure to comply would allow the trial court to initiate proceedings under Sections 209 and 269 of the BNS or Section 84 of the BNSS

Source reference: para. 7
Chhattisgarh High Court

Original Court PDF

DAYANIDHI SAVvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High Court · March 16, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment