Allowed

Arvind Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC14 Sept 2026MCRC/7940/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a first bail application filed under Section 483 BNSS 2023. The applicant, arrested for offences under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act following a liquor seizure, was granted bail on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one surety, noting the trial's likely duration.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one surety of equal amount, conditioned against tampering with witnesses, prejudicing the trial, and ensuring court appearance.

Arvind Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

CGHC010315102026

2026:CGHC:40231

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

MCRC No. 7940 of 2026

¶7

Arvind Yadav S/o Sohan Yadav Aged About 48 Years R/o Village - Jhakhar Para, Police Station - Devbhog, District - Gariyaband (C.G.). ... Applicant

¶8

versus

¶9

Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLEState Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Devbhog, District Gariyaband (C.G.). ... Non-applicant

¶10

For Applicant : Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate For Non-applicant : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer

¶11

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶12

Order on Board

¶13

15.09.2026

¶14

The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.229/2026, registered at P.S. Devbhog, District Gariyaband for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act.

¶15

The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the officers of Police Station Nandini Nagar, Durg, received a secret information from the informant and on the basis of the said information conducted a raid and seized 50 liter country made liquor from the possession of the

¶16

¶17

applicant, thereafter, Police has registered an aforesaid offence against the present applicant.

¶18

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. He would further submit that the present applicant has only two criminal antecedents, one registered under Section 34(1) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, in which he has been acquitted, and the second under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, which is pending consideration. The applicant is in jail since 13.07.2026; the chargesheet has already been filed, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time; thus, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant.

¶19

On the other hand, the learned State counsel would oppose the bail application and submit that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. She would further submit that 50 liters of country made liquor was seized from the possession of the present applicant, therefore, he is not entitled to grant of regular bail.

¶20

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

¶21

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the fact that the present applicant has only two criminal antecedents, one registered under Section 34(1) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, in which he has been acquitted, and the second under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, which is pending consideration, and further considering that the applicant is in jail since 13.07.2026, the charge-sheet has already been filed, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶22

¶23

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 following conditions :-

¶24

(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,

¶25

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

¶26

(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.

¶27

The observation made hereinabove is for the purpose of deciding this

¶28

bail application only, the trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judge

¶31

Nadim

Arvind Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind Yadav 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