Devendra Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Applicant has filed this third bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 169 of 2026 registered at Police Station –Tilda Nevra District- Raipur, (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the CG Excise Act, 1915. First bail application of the present applicant was dismissed on merits vide order dated 21.05.2026 in MCRC No. 4836 of 2026. Second bail application of the present applicant was also withdrawn vide order dated 25.06.2026 in MCRC No. 5590 of 2026.

¶18

Case of prosecution in brief is that on 24.04.2026, acting on secret information, the police intercepted a two-wheeler bearing registration

¶19

2

¶20

no. CG 04 QL 2144 and, upon search, recovered 60 quarters of English liquor and 40 quarters of country-made liquor. Subsequently, an FIR in this regard was lodged and the present application was arrested on 22.04.2026.

¶21

Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime, he has not committed offence as alleged. He further submits that first bail application of the applicant was dismissed on merits, however, one of the consideration was that the investigation was not completed and charge-sheet has not been filed. But as of now, the investigation has been completed and charge sheet has also been filed on 27.05.2026. He further submits that the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated in MCRC No. 4937 of 2026. Applicant is in jail since 22.04.2026, therefore, trial may take considerable time to conclude, hence he may be enlarged on bail.

¶22

On the other hand, learned counsel for State opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and submits that there are four criminal antecedents registered against the applicant including the present one. Applicant is involved in another crime of similar offence i.e. under Section 34 of the Excise Act, 1915. However, he do not dispute the fact that charge sheet has been filed.

¶23

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents enclosed along with the bail application.

¶24

On due consideration of the submission made by learned counsel for the respective parties and further considering that co-accused has been enlarged on bail by this Court, charge sheet has been filed, trial may take considerable time to conclude as also looking to the tender age of

¶25

3

¶26

the applicant i.e. only 22 years, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this application.

¶27

Accordingly, bail application is allowed . It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that-

¶28

(a) 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.

¶29

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

¶30

(c) 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.

¶31

(d) 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.

¶32

4

¶33

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

¶34

Certified copy as per rules.

¶35

sd/-

¶36

(Parth Prateem Sahu) JUDGE

¶37

Alfiza

Devendra Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devendra Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manikant Baghel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Susanna Toppo Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bhagwat Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vijay Kumar Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dashrath Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh