Allowed

Umesh Kerketta v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC16 Sept 2026MCRC/6754/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh granted regular bail to the applicant in a case involving possession of prohibited liquor. The court considered the quantity of seized items, filed chargesheet, criminal antecedents, and likely trial duration before directing release on a personal bond.

What did the court decide?

Grant of regular bail on execution of a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety in the like sum subject to conditions not to interfere with witnesses and appear for trial.

Umesh Kerketta Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

CGHC010287502026 2026:CGHC:40569

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCRC No. 6754 of 2026

¶6

Umesh Kerketta S/o Basant Kerketta Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Pachpedi, Police Station And Tahsil- Sarangarh, District- SarangarhBilaigarh (C.G.)

... Applicant(s)

KUNAL

DEWANGAN

versus

Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN

¶12

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Excise Officer, Excise Circle Sarangarh, District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.)

¶13

... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Priya Sharma, Panel Lawyer

¶14

Hon'ble Mr. Rakesh Mohan Pandey, Judge

¶15

Order on Board

¶16

17/09/2026

¶17

1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'BNSS'), for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.41/2026, registered at Police Station Excise Circle, Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 34(1)(A)(f), 34(2) and 59-A of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act.

¶18

¶19

2. Prosecution story in brief is that on 09.07.2026, the Excise Officer, Excise Circle, Sarangarh, received secret information through an informant that the applicant was in possession of liquor. On the basis of the said information, the Excise officials conducted a raid and allegedly recovered 45 litres of Mahua liquor and 225 kilograms of Mahua Lahan from the possession of the applicant. Accordingly, the aforesaid crime has been registered against the applicant.

¶20

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He would further submit that the alleged liquor has not been recovered from the exclusive possession of the applicant and the same was recovered from an open place. He would also submit that the applicant is in jail since 09.07.2026, charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and the conclusion of trial is likely to take some time. So far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, he has five criminal antecedents, out of which three cases are under the Excise Act, two of which have already been disposed of with fine, whereas one case under the Excise Act is still pending. The remaining two cases are preventive in nature and relate to the years 2024 and 2025. Accordingly, he prays for grant of regular bail.

¶21

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that 45 litres of Mahua liquor and 25 kilograms of Mahua Lahan have been seized from the possession of the applicant. She would further submit that the charge-sheet has

¶22

¶23

already been filed and the applicant has five criminal antecedents, out of which three cases are under the Excise Act and two cases are preventive in nature pertaining to the years 2024 and 2025. Out of the three Excise Act cases, one case is still pending consideration as such, the applicant is a habitual offender therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶24

5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary as well as the material available on record.

¶25

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the applicant, the quantity of liquor and Mahua Lahan seized and further the fact that the chargesheet has already been filed and the period of detention of the applicant since 09.07.2026 and further considering the criminal antecedents of the applicant and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time thus without further commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

¶26

7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed . 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 the following conditions:-

¶27

(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;

¶28

¶29

(ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, &

¶30

(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.

¶31

8. Ofce is directed to send a certif fi ed copy of this order to the trial i Court for necessary information and compliance. dorthwith.

¶32

S/Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶33

Kunal

Umesh Kerketta v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umesh Kerketta v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases