Chhattisgarh High Court
MCRCA/1492/2026 of MAHENDRA RAMNATH SAHARE Vs THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 10 September 2026
2026:CGHC:39916 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1492 of 2026 1 - Mahendra Ramnath Sahare S/o Shri Ramnath Sahare, Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Kohka, Post Belkathi, Tahsil Korchi, District Gadchiroli, (Maharashtra). ... Applicant versus 1 - The State Of
CGHC010352332026
2026:CGHC:39916
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRCA No. 1492 of 2026
1 - Mahendra Ramnath Sahare S/o Shri Ramnath Sahare, Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Kohka, Post Belkathi, Tahsil Korchi, District Gadchiroli, (Maharashtra).
... Applicant
versus
1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer, Police Station Mohla, District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki. (C. G.)
... Respondent
(Cause title is taken from CIS)
For Applicant
: Mr. Khilendra Sahu, Advocate
For State/Respondent
: Dr. Surendra Dewangan, Panel Lawyer
Hon’ble Shri Justice
Parth Prateem Sahu
Order on Board
11/09/2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
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…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Applicant has preferred this application under Section 482 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of anticipatory bail as he apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No. 67/2026 registered at Police Station- Mohla, District Mohla-
Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 34(2) of Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 27.07.2026, police upon receiving secret information reached to Village – Devarsur at house of Ghanshyam Nishad and upon investigation of the house situated in Kothar, police seized 19 cartoons of Goa whisky liquor. It was seized from the co-accused Ghanshyam Nishad and he was arrested. In his memorandum statement he stated the name of applicant that the alleged seized liquor is of the present applicant which is to be transported by the co-accused/applicant to Maharashtra. Thus, the applicant was also implicated in the crime in question.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was falsely implicated in the crime in question only on the basis of the memorandum statement of the co-accused.
4. Learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for applicant and would submit that the application is not maintainable in view of the bar under the act and further that the applicant is having 5 other criminal antecedents of similar nature against him of which 2 of the year 2026, 2 of the year 2022 and one of the year 2023 and therefore, applicant is not entitled for the benefit of the anticipatory bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the documents enclosed along with bail application.
6. On due consideration of submission of learned counsel for the parties and further considering the nature of allegations, criminal antecedents of the applicant and further considering that the provision under Section 59 (A) of Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915, I am of considered view that there is no error in the order impugned passed by learned Session Court rejecting the application taking note of Section 59 (A) of Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915 to be not maintainable.
7. Accordingly, this application filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 stands dismissed. Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu)
JUDGE Ravi Mandavi