Allowed

Agardas Sonkar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC16 Sept 2026MCRC/7167/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 483 of the BNS, 2023, the High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed the grant of regular bail to an applicant accused of违反 the C.G. Excise Act for possessing country-made liquor. The court noted the applicant's criminal antecedents but was inclined to grant bail.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted on execution of a personal bond for Rs. 50,000 with one surety to the satisfaction of the trial court.

Agardas Sonkar Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2026.09.17 16:06:34 +0530

CGHC010302502026

2026:CGHC:40544

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶7

MCRC No. 7167 of 2026

¶8

Agardas Sonkar S/o Samaru Aged About 46 Years R/o Resident Of Giraudhpuri, P.S. Gidhouri District Balodabazar Bhatapara C.G.

¶9

... Applicant

¶10

versus

¶11

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Excise Circle Kasdol, District Balodabazar Bhatapara C.G.

¶12

... Non-Applicant

¶13

For Applicant : Mr. Om Prakash Sahu, Advocate For State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

¶15

17.09.2026

¶16

This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 38/2026 registered at Police Station Excise Circle Kasdol, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of C.G. Excise Act.

¶17

The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the police of Police Station Excise Circle Kasdol received an information from the informant and on the basis of the said information conducted a raid and seized 20 bulk liters of country made mahua liquor and total 150 kg of mahua from the possession of the present applicant. Thereafter, Police has registered an aforesaid

¶18

¶19

offence against the present applicant.

¶20

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and the said 20 liters of country made mahua liquor were not seized from the exclusive possession of the applicant. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 01.07.2026, charge-sheet has been filed and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion. With regard to five criminal antecedents of applicant, it is argued that, in four cases he has been acquitted and one case is pending. He would pray for grant of bail to the present applicant.

¶21

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. She also submits that the applicant has three criminal antecedents under the Excise Act and two criminal antecedents under the BNS, which shows that the applicant is a habitual offender, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail in the present case.

¶22

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

¶23

Perusal of the additional affidavits filed on 06.08.2026 and 16.09.2026 would show that the applicant has five criminal antecedents. Out of the said cases, the applicant has already been acquitted in four cases, out of which two cases were registered for the offences punishable under the provisions of Excise Act and the other two cases were registered for the offences punishable under the provisions of the BNS and one case is pending consideration before the learned Court below.

¶24

¶25

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the present applicant and the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and he is in jail since 01.07.2026. Further looking to the quantity of the liquor i.e. 20 liters, I am inclined to allow this bail application.

¶26

Accordingly, the regular bail application is allowed and 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

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

¶29

(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.

¶30

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

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

$iddhant

Agardas Sonkar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Agardas Sonkar 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