Chhattisgarh High Court

MCRC/9242/2026 of BHAGWAT BARLE Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 14 October 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

2026:CGHC:44706 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9242 of 2026 Bhagwat Barle S/o Premdas Barle Aged About 38 Years R/o Vill- Amodi, P.S. Kharora, Distt- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Arang, Distt- Raipur (C.G.) ...

CGHC010386202026

2026:CGHC:44706

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

MCRC No. 9242 of 2026

Bhagwat Barle S/o Premdas Barle Aged About 38 Years R/o Vill- Amodi, P.S. Kharora, Distt- Raipur (C.G.)

... Applicant(s)

versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Arang, Distt- Raipur (C.G.)

... Non-Applicant(s)

For Applicant

: Ms. Ekta Sahu, Advocate.

For Non-Applicant/State

: Mr. Vivek Sharma, Panel Lawyer

Hon'ble Mr. Rakesh Mohan Pandey, Judge

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. The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 436/2026 registered at Police Station Arang, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act.

2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on the basis of secret information received from an informant, the police of Police Station Arang proceeded to the spot and allegedly found the applicant along with the co-accused persons carrying 160 quarters of country liquor, each containing 180 ml, totalling 28.8 bulk litres, in a Maruti Suzuki Ertiga car bearing registration No. CG-04-QB-5200, for the purpose of illegal sale. On the basis of the aforesaid seizure, the offence was registered against the applicant and the co-accused person.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He would further submit that the alleged liquor was recovered from an Ertiga car belonging to the co-accused, whereas the applicant was merely a passenger travelling in the vehicle while returning home from a social function and was unaware of the alleged possession of liquor. He would also submit that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 14.09.2026. As the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the prayer for grant of bail and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the applicant has no criminal antecedents but considering the quantity of liquor seized and the nature of the offence, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

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, nature and gravity of the allegations alleged against the applicant, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, the quantity of liquor seized from his possession, the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, the period of incarceration since 14.09.2026 and the fact that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant

7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail on 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. -

S/- Sd/-

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)

Judge Kunal

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.

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