MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Nandita Dubey, J.
Meghnath Kol And Another - Appellant
Versus
State Of Madhya Pradesh - Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 30495 of 2020
Decided On : 07-09-2020
Bail - M.P. Excise Act - The court allowed the bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the M.P. Excise Act, considering the quantity of liquor seized from the applicants.
Fact of the Case:
The applicants filed a bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in connection with a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the M.P. Excise Act, involving the seizure of illegal country made liquor from their possession.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the bail application, stating that it is a fit case to enlarge the applicants on bail, without expressing any view on the merits of the case.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicants should be granted bail in connection with the offence under the M.P. Excise Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the quantity of the liquor seized from the applicants and granted bail without expressing any view on the merits of the case.
Final Decision: The applicants were directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and complying with specified conditions.
JUDGMENT
Nandita Dubey, J. - This is the first bail application filed by the applicants under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in connection with Crime No. 440/2020 registered at P.S. Nagod, District Satna for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the M.P. Excise Act.
2. As per prosecution, 60 bulk litres of illegal country made liquor alleged to have been seized from the possession of the applicants.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. The applicants are in custody since 15.08.2020 and the trial would take considerable time to conclude, therefore they be released on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer opposed the bail application and prayed for rejection of the same. However, he fairly submits that there is no criminal antecedents against the present applicants.
5. Considering the quantity of the liquor seized from the applicants, I am of the view that it is a fit case to enlarge the applicants on bail, therefore, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, this application is allowed.
6. It is directed that the applicants shall be released on bail on their each furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 35,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for their presence before the said Court on all the dates of hearing fixed in this regard during the trial.
7. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions :-
"1. The applicants will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him.
2. The applicants will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The applicants will not indulge themselves in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicants shall not commit any other offence during pendency of the trial, failing which this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically without further reference to the Bench;
5. The applicants will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;
6. The applicants will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
7. The learned concerned Magistrate and the prosecution are directed to ensure following of Covid-19 precautionary protocol prescribed from time to time by the Supreme Court, the Central Govt. and as well as the State Govt. during release, travel and residence of the applicant during period of bail as a consequence of this order."
8. A typed copy of this order be forwarded by the Registry to the Office of the Advocate General and to Mr.Sheetal Tiwari, learned Panel Lawyer, on their respective email address, for intimation to the Police Station concerned. The office is also directed to forward a copy of this order to the learned Court below.
Certified copy/e-copy as per rules/directions.
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.