Criminal antecedents and misuse of previous bail justify denial of bail despite prolonged custody.

On January 7, 2026, police at Police Station Patewa seized 69.120 bulk litres of illicit country-made liquor allegedly from the possession of the applicants, Kamlesh Kumar Dadsena and Sharad Tiwari

The applicants were arrested and charged under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act

The applicants sought regular bail, arguing false implication and political vendetta

While Applicant No. 2 had no prior record, the State opposed the bail noting that Applicant No. 1 had nine previous criminal antecedents, including four under the Excise Act

1. Whether Applicant No. 1, being a habitual offender with significant criminal antecedents, is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS

2. Whether Applicant No. 2, having no criminal antecedents and given the volume of contraband seized, is entitled to regular bail pending trial

The court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) regarding the grant of regular bail

Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act

Precedent set by the Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another (2022) 8 SCC 559, which establishes that bail can be denied or cancelled if the accused has significant criminal antecedents

For Applicant No. 1, the Court observed that he is a "habitual offender" with nine criminal antecedents and had previously misused the liberty of bail granted to him.

Applying the logic from Deepak Yadav, the Court found him unfit for release due to the likelihood of further offenses.

For Applicant No. 2, the Court noted the absence of a criminal record and the fact that the seized liquor was below "commercial quantity".

Since the charge-sheet was already filed and the trial was expected to take considerable time, the Court determined that continued incarceration of Applicant No. 2 was unnecessary compared to the need for personal liberty.

The Court allowed the bail application for Applicant No. 2 (Sharad Tiwari), ordering his release on a personal bond with two local sureties, subject to strict conditions.