Chhattisgarh High Court
MCRC/7894/2017 of James Farnadis Vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 December 2017
CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 7894 of 2017 James Farnadis S/o Rajesh Farnadis, Aged About 48 Years R/o Zone 01, Sadak 16, Charoda Jhopdi, Police Station G. R. P. Charoda, District Durg Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Durg District Durg
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRC No. 7894 of 2017
James Farnadis S/o Rajesh Farnadis, Aged About 48 Years R/o Zone01, Sadak 16, Charoda Jhopdi, Police Station G. R. P. Charoda,District Durg Chhattisgarh
---- Applicant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Durg District DurgChhattisgarh
---- Respondent
For the applicant: Mr. Sourabh Shukla, AdvocateFor Respondent:Mr. R.N. Pusty, Govt. Advocate 23/12/2017
Hon'ble Shri Justice Ram Prasanna SharmaOrder On Board
1. This is an application filed under Section 439 of the Code ofCriminal Procedure seeking grant of regular bail to theapplicant in connection with Crime No. 163/2017 registeredat P.S. Excise Circle Bhilai-4 District Durg (C.G) for the offencepunishable under Sections 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh ExciseAct. Criminal Procedure seeking grant of regular bail to theapplicant in connection with Crime No. 163/2017 registeredat P.S. Excise Circle Bhilai-4 District Durg (C.G) for the offencepunishable under Sections 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh ExciseAct.
2. The prosecution alleges that when a raid/inspection wasconducted by the Police, 7.56 bulk litres of illicit liquor wasseized from the possession of the applicant. conducted by the Police, 7.56 bulk litres of illicit liquor wasseized from the possession of the applicant.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicanthas been falsely implicated in this case as no seizure wasmade in person from him. He further submits that theapplicant is in jail since 04-11-2017 and the alleged seizurehaving been made, no further investigation is necessary,therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.has been falsely implicated in this case as no seizure wasmade in person from him. He further submits that theapplicant is in jail since 04-11-2017 and the alleged seizurehaving been made, no further investigation is necessary,therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.
Page 1 of 2
4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bailapplication. However, he submits that earlier no case ofsimilar nature u/s 34(2) of the Excise Act was registeredagainst the applicant.application. However, he submits that earlier no case ofsimilar nature u/s 34(2) of the Excise Act was registeredagainst the applicant.
5. Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstancesand the fact that the quantity of seized liquor in this case is7.56 bulk litres; offence is triable by the JMFC and theapplicant is in jail since 04-11-2017 this Court is inclined torelease him on bail. Accordingly, this application is allowed.and the fact that the quantity of seized liquor in this case is7.56 bulk litres; offence is triable by the JMFC and theapplicant is in jail since 04-11-2017 this Court is inclined torelease him on bail. Accordingly, this application is allowed.
6. The applicant is directed to be released on bail on hisexecuting a personal bond in sum of Rs.20,000/- with onesurety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concernedtrial Court. He shall also appear before the said Court as andwhen directed by the said Court.executing a personal bond in sum of Rs.20,000/- with onesurety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concernedtrial Court. He shall also appear before the said Court as andwhen directed by the said Court.
C.C. today.
Sd/-
(Ram Prasanna Sharma) Winter Holiday Judge
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…