Mamta Nirmal Dhamgaye vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Ramesh Sinha, J

This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 58/2025 registered at Police Station Mohan Nagar, District Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act.

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the police has received information through informant that on the date of incident, the unknown persons have kept illegal liquor in their vehicle to sale, and police has seized 729 bulk liters country made liquor from incident place which is situated courtyard of applicant at open place and applicant did not produce any document of seized liquor and hence police has registered a case for offence punishable under Section 34(2) of C.G. Excise Act against the applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and 729 bulk liters of country made liquor was not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant. It has vehemently been argued on behalf of the applicant that the vehicle in question, in which, liquor was seized, was driver by the co-accused, namely, Lakhan Baisa and the applicant belongs to the State of Maharashtra. Though the son of the applicant, in whose name the FIR has been lodged, is still absconding, but there is no role of the present applicant in the instant crime. It has also been argued that all in all 09 cases were registered against the applicant, but out of which, in 06 cases registered under the Section 65 E in the State of Maharashtra, the applicant has been acquitted. The applicant, being a lady, is in jail since 13.02.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant.

Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court and the the applicant is having 6 criminal antecedents registered against the applicant under Provision Act 1949 under Section 65E in the State of Maharashtra. He further submits that 729 bulk liters of the country made liquor was recovered from the possession of the applicant, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail.

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

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and 729 bulk liters of country made liquor was not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant and the vehicle in question, in which, liquor was seized, was driver by the co-accused, namely, Lakhan Baisa and the applicant belongs to the State of Maharashtra and that though all in all 09 cases were registered against the applicant, but out of which, in 06 cases registered under the Section 65 E in the State of Maharashtra, the applicant has been acquitted and the applicant, being a lady, is in jail since 13.02.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

Let the applicant – Smt. Mamta Nirmal Dhamgaye involved in Crime No. 58/2025 registered at Police Station Mohan Nagar, District Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two local sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously from the receipt of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment.

Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith.