Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/4409/2024 of ANKIT Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGHON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 4409 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
ANKIT S/O RAMESH JADHAV, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,OCCUPATION: LABOR R/O 242 F SECTOR RAJ NAGARINDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI KAMAL PALAYA, ADVOCATE)
.....APPLICANT
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSEOFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION CHANDANNAGAR, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI SAMEER VERMA, PANEL LAWYER)
.....RESPONDENT
This application coming on for orders this day, the court passed the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 439 ofCode of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of bail during trial. The applicant isfacing trial in connection with Crime No.1357/2023, dated (not mentioned)registered at Police Station-Chandan Nagar, District - Indore for offence underSections 49(A) & 34 of M.P. Excise Act, 1915. The applicant is in jail since08.12.2023.
2. As per the prosecution story, 05 bulk liters country made spuriousliquor is said to be seized from the possession of the applicant.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime. FSL report is yet to beawaited, hence, it cannot be said that the liquor is spurious or not. The applicantis in custody since 08.12.2023 and conclusion of trial will take sufficient longtime. Under these circumstances, prayer was made for grant of bail to theapplicant.
4. Learned Counsel for the State has opposed the application and prayedfor its rejection.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and custodyperiod of the applicant, without commenting on the merits of the case, thisapplication is allowed.
7. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on his/her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only)with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court forsecuring his/her presence before the said Court on all the dates of hearing fixedin this regard during trial. It is also directed that the applicant shall comply withthe provisions of Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.
8. It is made clear that if in the FSL report it is found that the liquor isspurious then this bail order shall stand cancelled without further reference tothis Court and he shall surrender before the trial Court.
9. This order shall remain effective till the end of the trial, but in case ofbail jump and breach of any of the pre-condition of bail, it shall becomeineffective and cancelled without reference to this Bench. Certified Copy as per rules.
(PREM NARAYAN SINGH)JUDGE