Back
2014 Supreme(Chh) 212
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
P. Sam Koshy, J.
Sanjay Kumar Verma
Vs.
State of C.G.
M.Cr.C. No. 3419 of 2014
Decided On: 09.07.2014
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff:Uttam Pandey, Advocate
For Respondents/Defendant: Wasim Miya, P.L.
The main legal point established is that bail may be granted when there is insufficient evidence to implicate the accused in the alleged offence, especially when a co-accused in a similar case has been granted bail.
Headnote:
Bail - Excise Act - The court granted bail to the applicant under Section 439 Cr.P.C. as there was insufficient evidence to implicate the applicant in the transportation of liquor, and considering the bail granted to a co-accused in a similar case.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant sought bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for being arrested in connection with an offence under Section 34(2) of the Excise Act. The prosecution alleged that the applicant was in the company of individuals transporting foreign made liquor, but the only evidence was the statement of one of the individuals involved.
Finding of the Court:
The court, after considering the facts and circumstances, found that there was insufficient evidence to implicate the applicant and granted bail, emphasizing the lack of evidence and the bail granted to a co-accused in a similar case.
Issues: The main issue was the sufficiency of evidence to implicate the applicant in the offence under the Excise Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of substantial evidence against the applicant and the bail granted to a co-accused in a similar case.
Final Decision: The court allowed the application and directed the release of the applicant on bail upon executing a personal bond.
P. Sam Koshy, J.
1. The applicant had preferred this application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime No. 90/2014 registered at Police Station -Dongargarh Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of Excise Act. As per the case of prosecution, on 13.3.14, the present applicant was in the company of one Kamal Verma and Madhukar Rao, who were traveling in a Tata Indica bearing registration No. CG 07 AM 8425 which is intercepted by 3 accused persons. The present applicant and Kamal Verma had fled away from the spot and it was Madhukar Rao who was arrested along with vehicle containing 146.88 liters of foreign made liquor. It is the further case of the prosecution that at the behest of Madhukar Rao and Kamal Verma, the present applicant has been arrested on 13.3.14 and has been prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of Excise Act.
2. Counsel for the applicant submits that except for the statement of Madhukar Rao, there is no iota of evidence so as to implicate the present applicant of transporting the said liquor in the vehicle which is seized by the police authorities. He further submits that one of the co-accused namely Punesh Kumar Sahu, at whose instance liquor was being transported by the accused persons in the vehicle has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 16.4.14 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 1581/14 and therefore, the present applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the grounds of parity.
3. On the contrary, counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail. However, he submits that taking into consideration the quantity of liquor, the present applicant should not be released on bail. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and on perusing the case diary, it is evident that it was only at the instance of Madhukar Rao who has given a statement that the present applicant was accompanying him along with the liquor and that the present applicant had subsequently fled away from the spot. It is also noteworthy to mention here that Kamal Verma has not been made an accused person in this case whose name is also reflected in the statement of Madhukar Rao and that the present applicant is in jail since 13.3.14, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the applicant can be released on bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of the applicant's executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, he shall be released on bail. He shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.
