Shaila Ratre vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Ramesh Sinha, J

The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.640/2024, registered at Police Station – Mandir Hasaud, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act.

The prosecution story in brief, is that, a secret information received by the Police of Police Station - Mandir Hasaud, District – Raipur (C.G.) through the informant and on the basis of such information, the police has seized a total of 17.100 bulk liters of Mahua liquor from the illegal possession of the applicant. Thereafter, the applicant was arrested and the offence has been registered.

It was argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and falsely implicated in this case. She further submits that the he has 3 criminal antecedents under the Excise Act which is still pending, and the charge-sheet has been filed, he is in jail since 23.09.2024 and trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that huge quantity of liquor i.e. 17.100 bulk liters of Mahua liquor has been recovered from the illegal possession of the applicant. It is also submitted that the applicant has 3 criminal antecedents under the Excise Act which are still pending and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case, therefore, his bail application is liable to be dismissed.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the fact that the applicant is having 3 criminal antecedents under the Excise Act and he is a habitual offender, further he has misused the bail granted to him earlier, and that the quantity of liquor seized is 17.100 bulk liters of Mahua liquor and also in light of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Deepak Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, reported in (2022) 8 SCC 559, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court had cancelled the bail granted to the accused therein on the ground that the accused had previous antecedents, this Court is of the opinion that is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail.

Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Shaila Ratre filed under Section 483 of BNSS, involved in Crime No.640/2024, registered at Police Station – Mandir Hasaud, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the C.G. Excise Act, is rejected.

Needless to say that the trial Court is at liberty to proceed to with the trial and conclude the same, expeditiously.

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