Chhattisgarh High Court

Regular Bail Granted in Excise Matter Despite Criminal Antecedents Where Trial Conclusion is Likely to be Protractedly Delayed

Jaiprakash Rohidas @ Bhruu v. State of Chhattisgarh [2026:CGHC:9295]

Chhattisgarh High CourtJUDGMENT: no citation2 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The applicant was arrested on December 20, 2025, following a police raid at his backyard in village Podi, where 50 litres of handmade "kachi" Mahua liquor, valued at approximately Rs. 15,000, were seized.

Source reference: para. 2

The applicant was charged under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act.

Source reference: para. 1

The applicant moved the High Court for regular bail, contending false implication and noting that the trial would be lengthy.

Source reference: para. 3

The State opposed the bail, citing the recovery of the liquor and the applicant’s two prior criminal antecedents under the Indian Penal Code.

Source reference: para. 4
02

Issues

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering the quantity of liquor seized and his criminal history.

Source reference: para. 1, 6
03

Law Applied

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

Source reference: para. 1

It also considered Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, which prescribes a minimum punishment of one year and a maximum of three years for the illegal possession/sale of liquor.

Source reference: para. 3

Additionally, procedural compliance was governed by Sections 269 (punishment for non-attendance), 84 (proclamation for person absconding), 209 (failure to appear), and 351 (recording of statement) of the BNSS and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

Source reference: para. 7
04

Reasoning

The Court balanced the gravity of the allegations and the quantity of the seizure (50 litres) against the period of the applicant's incarceration since December 20, 2025.

Source reference: para. 6

Although the State highlighted two criminal antecedents under the IPC, the Court noted that the charge-sheet had already been filed, meaning custodial interrogation was no longer required.

Source reference: para. 4, 6

The Court reasoned that since the maximum sentence for the offense is relatively short (three years) and the conclusion of the trial would likely take a considerable amount of time, continued pretrial detention was not warranted.

Source reference: para. 3, 6
05

Holding

The Court answered the issue in the affirmative and allowed the bail application.

The applicant was ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, subject to strict conditions: he must not seek unnecessary adjournments, must appear at every stage of the trial (framing of charges, recording of evidence, etc.), and any violation of liberty or failure to appear may result in proceedings under Sections 269 or 209 of the BNS.

Source reference: para. 7
Chhattisgarh High Court

Original Court PDF

Jaiprakash Rohidas @ Bhruu v. State of Chhattisgarh [2026:CGHC:9295]

Chhattisgarh High Court · no citation

Click to open original judgment

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

Click to open original judgment