Back
2006 Supreme(Chh) 67
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
Sunil Kumar Sinha
ASHA BAI NANDU DHOBI - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH - Respondents
M. Cr. C. 63 Of 2006
Decided On : February 7, 2006
The circumstances of the case, including the presence of other inmates in the house where the seizure was made, influenced the court's decision to grant bail to the applicant.
Headnote:
Regular Bail - Excise Act - The court granted regular bail to the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, considering the circumstances of the case and the fact that the seizure was made from one of the rooms in the house of the applicant where she was not the only inmate.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed for regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act, after being arrested in connection with the seizure of country-made liquor from her house.
Finding of the Court:
The court, considering the circumstances and the fact that the applicant was not the only inmate of the house where the seizure was made, granted bail to the applicant.
Issues: Regular bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the circumstances of the case, including the fact that the applicant was not the only inmate of the house where the seizure was made, warranted granting bail to the applicant.
Final Decision: The applicant's bail application was allowed, and she was granted regular bail.
( 1 ) HEARD.
( 2 ) THIS is an application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 370/2005, registered at Police Station (Excise) - Bhilai Nagar, Durg for the offence punishable under Section 34 (2) of the Excise Act.
( 3 ) THE case of the prosecution is that on a search of the house of the applicant, it was found that there was 30. 06 bulk litres of country made liquor in the house.
( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is not the only inmate of the house. He also submits that a false seizure has been made against her. He further submits that there are no criminal antecedents of this of applicant and she has been falsely implicated in this case. He prays or releasing the applicant on bail.
( 5 ) ON the other hand, learned Counsel for the State opposes the pail application.
( 6 ) CONSIDERING the facts and circumstances of this case, particularly considering the circumstance that the seizure is said to have been made from one of the rooms in the house of the applicant and the applicant is not the only inmate of the house, I am of the opinion that present is a fit case in which the applicant should be enlarged on bail. Her application is allowed.
--- *** ---
.
