Regular bail granted after charge-sheet filing, acquittal in a prior similar case, and likely prolonged trial.

On 12 June 2026, Excise Circle Kosir officials, while on patrol, allegedly received information that Pankaj Chauhan was illegally possessing country-made liquor. Acting on the information, they conducted a raid and allegedly recovered 31 litres of country-made liquor from his possession. Crime No. 13/2026 was registered at Excise Circle-Kosir, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, for offences under Sections 34(2) and 59-A of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, and the applicant was arrested

The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. He claimed false implication, disputed exclusive possession, pointed out that the charge-sheet had been filed, and stated that he had remained in custody since 12 June 2026. His previous case of a similar nature had ended in acquittal, and he argued that the trial would take considerable time

The State opposed bail, relying principally on the alleged recovery of 31 litres of liquor and the applicant’s previous similar criminal antecedent

1. Whether the applicant was entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in relation to offences under Sections 34(2) and 59-A of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act?

2. Whether the filing of the charge-sheet, the applicant’s period of custody, the previous acquittal, and the anticipated delay in trial justified release on bail despite the alleged recovery of 31 litres of liquor?

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, governing the High Court’s power to grant regular bail. The alleged offences were under Sections 34(2) and 59-A of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act; the applicant submitted that Section 34(2) carried a minimum punishment of one year and a maximum punishment of three years

In deciding bail, the Court considered the nature and gravity of the allegations, the material relied upon by the prosecution, the applicant’s period of custody, filing of the charge-sheet, prior criminal antecedents and their outcome, and the likely duration of the trial

The Court acknowledged the seriousness of the allegation and the recovery of 31 litres of country-made liquor. However, it also noted that the charge-sheet had already been filed, thereby reducing the immediate need for continued custodial investigation; the applicant had remained in custody since 12 June 2026; and the trial was likely to take time

Although the applicant had a prior case of a similar nature, that case had resulted in acquittal and was therefore not treated as an adverse antecedent warranting denial of bail. Balancing these circumstances against the nature of the alleged offence and the period of detention, the Court found it appropriate to grant regular bail

Bail was subject to conditions requiring him not to seek unnecessary adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present before the trial court as directed, to comply with proceedings relating to non-appearance, and to appear personally on the dates fixed for opening of the case, framing of charge, and recording of his statement under Section 351 of the BNSS. A certified copy of the order was directed to be sent to the trial court for compliance