Chhattisgarh High Court
MCRC/7923/2017 of Mohan Lal Vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 December 2017
CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 7923 of 2017 Mohan Lal S/o Vikram Patel, Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Amlikapa, P. S. Jarhagaon, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P. S. Excise Circle Mungeli, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For the
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRC No. 7923 of 2017
Mohan Lal S/o Vikram Patel, Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Amlikapa, P. S. Jarhagaon, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh
---- Applicant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through P. S. Excise Circle Mungeli, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh
---- Respondent
For the applicant: Shri Basudeo son of the applicant who has filed the affidavit on behalf of the applicant is present in person.
For 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.175/2017 registeredat P.S. Excise Circle Mungeli, District Mungeli (C.G) for theoffence punishable under Sections 34(1) (A), 34(2), 59-A ofthe Chhattisgarh Excise Act. Criminal Procedure seeking grant of regular bail to theapplicant in connection with Crime No.175/2017 registeredat P.S. Excise Circle Mungeli, District Mungeli (C.G) for theoffence punishable under Sections 34(1) (A), 34(2), 59-A ofthe Chhattisgarh Excise Act.
2. The prosecution alleges that when a raid/inspection wasconducted by the Police, 7 bulk litres of illicit liquor wasseized from the possession of the applicant. conducted by the Police, 7 bulk litres of illicit liquor wasseized from the possession of the applicant.
Page 1 of 2
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 27-11-2017 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 27-11-2017 and the alleged seizurehaving been made, no further investigation is necessary,therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.
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 is 7bulk litres; offence is triable by the JMFC and the applicant isin jail since 27-11-2017 this Court is inclined to release himon bail. Accordingly, this application is allowed.and the fact that the quantity of seized liquor in this case is 7bulk litres; offence is triable by the JMFC and the applicant isin jail since 27-11-2017 this Court is inclined to release himon 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…