Chhattisgarh High Court

MCRC/9217/2026 of KARAN SONI Vs THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 14 October 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

2026:CGHC:44650 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9217 of 2026 Karan Soni S/o Shri Mohan Soni Aged About 26 Years R/o Ward No. 09, Nayapara Mahasamund Thana Tehsil And District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station

CGHC010385622026

2026:CGHC:44650

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

MCRC No. 9217 of 2026

Karan Soni S/o Shri Mohan Soni Aged About 26 Years R/o Ward No. 09, Nayapara Mahasamund Thana Tehsil And District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

... Applicant

versus

The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Mahasamund District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Shri Rajendra Patel, Advocate.

For Non-applicant/State : Shri Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer.

(HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY)

Order on Board

15/10/2026

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.517/2026 registered at Police Station Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act.

2. As per the case of the prosecution, on 08.09.2026, upon secret information, the police reached the spot and seized 12.600 bulk litre country made liuquor from the applicant and co-accused persons, who were transporting the same by the vehicle No. CG-06-HB-5345.

Thereafter, the police registered the offence as stated above, against the applicant.

3. Learned Counsel for the applicant would submit that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and the said 12.600 bulk liters country made liquor was not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant. It is further argued by him that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents under the Excise Act and under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, minimum punishment is one year and maximum punishment is three years and the present applicant has been in jail since 08.09.2026, conclusion of the trial is likely to take some considerable time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the bail application and submit that the applicant may abscond, if the bail is granted to him, therefore he is not entitled for grant of regular bail in the present case.

5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and having considered the quantity of liquor seized from joint the possession of the applicant and other co-accused persons and that, there are no criminal antecedents pending against the present applicant before the competent Court and he is in jail since 08.09.2026, conclusion of the trial may take some more time, without making any observation on merits of the matter, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

7. Let the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court;

(ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, &

(iii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

8. The observation made herein above is for the purpose of deciding this bail application only and the trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

Anjani

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead