Chhattisgarh High Court

MCRC/9002/2026 of DANIRAM BANJARA Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 8 October 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

2026:CGHC:43826 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9002 of 2026 Daniram Banjara S/o Motilal Banjara, Aged About 36 Years Resident Of Village Chakarda, Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.). ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station

CGHC010375002026

2026:CGHC:43826

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

MCRC No. 9002 of 2026

Daniram Banjara S/o Motilal Banjara, Aged About 36 Years Resident Of Village Chakarda, Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.).

... Applicant

versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Saraipali, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.).

... Non-Applicant

For Applicant

:

Ms. Gunja Taram, Advocate

For Non-Applicant

:

Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 09/10/2026

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 (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 249/2026, registered at Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 31.07.2026, the police party of Police Station Saraipali, upon receiving secret information, intercepted the applicant and seized 25 bulk litres of illicit country- made liquor from his illegal possession without any valid pass or licence. Thereafter, the aforesaid offence was registered against the applicant, and he was taken into custody on 31.07.2026.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. She further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant is in jail since 31.07.2026, the investigation is complete and the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent court, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time; therefore, she prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. He further submits that 25 bulk litres of country- made liquor was seized from the possession of the present applicant, therefore, he is not entitled to grant of regular bail.

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

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents; also considering the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant is in jail since 31.07.2026, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

7. 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 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, and

(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 hereinabove is for the purpose of deciding this bail application only, the trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits. Sd/-

Rakesh Mohan Pandey

JUDGE Nadim

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