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

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
SANJAY KUMAR SINGH
BABLU SINGH – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
BAIL/41427/2020



Court No. - 72

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41427 of 2020

Applicant :- Bablu Singh

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Puneet Srivastava,Rajesh Kumar

Srivastava,Vishnu Kumar

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional

Government Advocate representing the State and perused the

record of the case.

By means of this application, the applicant, Bablu Singh, who is

involved in Case Crime No. 116 of 2020, under Section 3/7

Essential Commodities Act, Police Station-Iglas, District-

Aligarh, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

As per the prosecution case on 19.03.2020, supply Inspector

lodged F.I.R. with regard to occurrence dated 18.03.2020

against the applicant Bablu Singh, Jagdish, Pawan, Rohtas,

Nobil and one unknown person alleging inter alia that on

receiving the secret information from the informer and pursuant

to direction of District Magistrate, raid was conducted at the

premises of the applicant, where co-accused Jagdish was found

present whereas other accused persons succeeded in fleeing

away from the place of occurrence. At that time one tanker No.

UP81 CT 7477 of Tarkol and one Tata Max vehicle without

number were standing there, in which several drums of spirit

were kept. It is the case of the prosecution that on taking search

of the premises of the applicant twelve drums containing 2300

liters diesel, nine drums containing 1700 liters petrol, one drum

containing 200 liters mixed spirit/petroleum substance and two

drums containing 300 liters kerosene oil were recovered.

Samples were drawn at the spot from the aforesaid recovered

petroleum substance. On asking about the documents regarding

aforesaid recovered petroleum substance, co-accused Jagdish

could not show any document. As such, there is violation of the

provisions of U.P. Kerosene Control Order, 1962; U.P. High

Speed Diesel Oil and Light Diesel Oil (Storage and

Distribution) Order, 1981 and Motor Spirit and High Speed

Diesel (Regulation of Supply, Distribution and Prevention of

Malpractices) Order, 2005, which is punishable under Section

3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the

applicant has been falsely implicated in this case for ulterior

purposes. There is no independent public witness of aforesaid

recovery. The applicant was not present at the spot. The

applicant is Gram Pradhan and also a contractor. He has four

Extroverts of JCB company, Four Dumper Trucks and five

Tankers, registration certificate of said vehicles have been

brought on record as Annexure No. 6 to the bail application. It

is submitted that some other vehicles also run under the

applicant. It is next submitted that according to Petroleum Act,

petroleum substance has been divided into three classes, namely

Class-A Petrol, Class-B diesel and Class-C Kerosene Oil.

It is next submitted that the alleged recovery of 1700 liters

petrol is not petrol but in fact the same is a solvent which is

used in washing clothes and also used in paint and for keeping

the same no license is needed. So far as petrol is concerned, it is

submitted that there is no need to have license upto six gallons

petrol. So far as Class-B Diesel is concerned, there is no need to

have license upto 2500 liters diesel and regarding Class-C

kerosene oil is concerned, there is no need to have license upto

45 liters. On the strength of aforesaid submission it is submitted

that according to Section 17(3) of U.P. High Speed Diesel Oil

and Light Speed Diesel Oil order, 1981, any person can keep

200 liters for every vehicle and the same shall not include the

diesel in the tank of the vehicle. It is further submitted that the

applicant has been involved in thirteen other criminal cases, out

of which in three cases the applicant has been acquitted, in four

cases fi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top