SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(Jhk) 1624

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANANT BIJAY SINGH, J.
Devendra Yadav @ Devendra Kumar – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Opposite-Party
A.B.A. No. 6511 of 2017
Decided On : 13-11-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: K.P. Deo.
For the Opposite-Party : Ashok Kr. A.P.P.

The main legal point established is the court's discretion in granting anticipatory bail and imposing specific conditions to ensure compliance with the law.

Headnote:

Anticipatory Bail - Excise Act - Indian Penal Code, Sections 272, 273, 379/411 - Excise Act, Section 47a

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner filed for anticipatory bail in connection with a case under Sections 272, 273, 379/411 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 47a of the Excise Act. The petitioner, a businessman, was accused of illegal wine manufacturing at his laboratory.

Finding of the Court:

The court directed the petitioner to surrender and granted bail upon surrender, subject to certain conditions.

Issues: The main issue was the petitioner's alleged involvement in illegal wine manufacturing and the grounds for seeking anticipatory bail.

Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the grounds presented in the second bail application and directed the petitioner to surrender, granting bail upon surrender with specific conditions.

Final Decision: The petitioner was directed to surrender and granted bail upon surrender, subject to specific conditions.

JUDGMENT :

1. The instant application for anticipatory bail filed on behalf of the petitioner, Devendra Yadav @ Devendra Kumar has been pressed.

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

3. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mohanpur P.S. Case No.32 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No.268 of 2017, lodged under Sections 272, 273, 379/411 of the Indian Penal Code and Under Section 47a of the Excise Act, pending in the court of learned SDJM, Deoghar.

4. The instant case has been lodged on the basis of the written report of the informant, namely, Shailesh Kumar, Circle Officer, Deoghar (Town), dated 14.02.2017, submitted before the Officer-in-Charge, Mohanpur Police Station, alleging therein that the S.I., P.S. : Bausi, Distt.: Banka, came to Mohanpur in connection with Bounsi (Bihar) P.S. Case No.20 of 2017 (dated 03.02.2017) lodged under Sections 292/273/414 IPC and 120B and 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Amendment and Prohibition Act and informed that one C.G.P. Laboratory situated at Khijuria P.S.: Mohanpur, where illegal wine was being manufactured and inspected the said premises on 14.02.2017. The SI, Bounsi P.S. along with local police officers and Inspector of Excise, Kundan Kumar Kaushal inspected the premises of the petitioner wherein they found that one tanker bearing Registration No.NL 01L 775 parked in the premises and spirit was taken out in the Drum. One person was apprehended who disclosed his name Uttam Kumar that the aforesaid tanker with consignment was going to Mizoram and as such, he could not satisfy the officers and the tanker contained 25,000 litre of spirit and hence, this case has been lodged.

5. It is relevant and important to mention herein that this is second application. The earlier application being ABA No.2435 of 2017 vide order dated 09.10.2017 was rejected after calling criminal antecedent of the petitioner.

6. It was found that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Hence, the second anticipatory bail application has been filed on the fresh grounds which are as follows :-

a. It has been submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and has been made accused as petitioner is successful businessman, belongs to a very respectable and reputed family. Petitioner after doing his post graduation and Management and clearing Bihar Eligibility Test for Lecturership started his business on the basis of valid license issued by department of Excise and Drug, Government of Jharkhand, since 2004.

b. It has further been submitted that the petitioner has been made accused as petitioner is proprietor of C.D.P. Laboratories, Khijuria, Deoghar, and the drug manufacturing unit is established over the ancestral property of the petitioner, where several other manufacturer as well as District Godown of Jharkhand Beverage situated, and the same land is on Deoghar-Sultanganj Main road.

c. It has been submitted that the said land is surrounded by a common boundary wall for all the units and it is wrong to allege that the Tanker carrying Spirit was standing for petitioner’s firm.

d. It has been submitted that seized tanker carrying spirit was standing inside the common boundary wall of the units and after this occurrence, petitioner being innocent person realized the reason for his false implication and thus surrounded his unit C.D.P. Laboratories by a boundary wall inside the aforesaid common boundary wall.

e. It has been submitted that the family background of the petitioner is that petitioner’s father is an agriculturist having ancestral agricultural land including this land on which different units are running on tenancy. The uncle of the petitioner was a public prosecutor and a practicing advocate at Deoghar Civil Court.

f. It has been submitted that the petitioner has always purchased spirit for his laboratory as per allotment issued by Excise department which will be apparent form perusal of three registers, i.e., RG-I (Register of vessel or receptac
















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top