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

2022 Supreme(Online)(MP) 8463

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Gopal – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
MCRC 33348/2022



Advocates:
Baldeep Singh Gandhi,Advocate General

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA ON THE 11th OF JULY, 2022 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 33348 of 2022 Between:-

GOPAL S/O CHHOGALAL MOGIYA , AGED ABOUT 35 YEA R S , OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE VILLAGE BANBANI (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (BY MR BALDEEP SINGH GANDHI-ADVOCATE)

AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION BHATPACHLANA (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (BY MS BHARTI LAKKAD -GOVT. ADVOCATE)

This application coming on for order this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

1. This is the first application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, as the applicant is implicated in connection with Crime No.150/2022 registered at Police Station Bhatpachlana, District Ujjain (M.P.) for offence punishable under Section 34(2) of M.P.

Excise Act.

2. The applicant is in custody since 19/04/2022.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per Signature Not Verified SAN prosecution story 55 bulk liter of country made liquor was allegedly Date: 2022.07.12 11r:1e4:3c5 IoSTvered from the possession of the present applicant that too without having any valid license. The applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case, thus keeping in view the quantity alleged to have been recovered from the applicant, he deserves to be released on bail.

4. The aforesaid prayer has been opposed by learned Panel Lawyer for the State submitting that in view of the allegations levelled against the applicant and the material collected by the prosecution against him he is not entitled to be released on bail.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case-diary.

6. The applicant has remained in custody since 19/04/2022 and possibility of the trial still taking a long time for its conclusion cannot be ruled out. Keeping in view the quantity alleged to have been recovered from the possession of applicant, in my opinion, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, application of the applicant is hereby allowed.

7. The applicant is directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one local solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his regular appearance before the trial Court during Signature Not Verifitedrial with a condition that he shall remain present before the Court SAN Digitally signed by RcASoHMnI cerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. 8. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.

Certified copy as per rules.

(PRANAY VERMA)

JUDGE rashmi Signature Not Verified SAN

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
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