NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 2260 of 2022 • Subhash Kushwaha S/o T.P. S Kushwaha Aged About 50 Years R/o House No. 101 Anand Nagar, Near Smriti Nagar Bhilai, Tehsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioner Versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate Durg Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent For Applicant Mr. Anand Mohan Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent /State Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer SB.: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari
Order On Board
25/4/2022 1. Heard.
2. This is an application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.141/2018, registered at Police Station Excise Circle, Durg, Inner South, District Durg for the offence punishable under Sections 34(1)
(A), 34(2), 36, 59A of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on a raid conducted in the premises of Land Landmark School, Resali, Padmanbhpur, 4190.4 bulk litres of illicit liquor (Desi Madira Plain Pav) was seized from the premises of the School. It is alleged that the applicant is the owner of the land on which the School has been constructed. The applicant had appointed the main accused Jitendra Sahu as the Watchman of the School. It is also claimed that during the Vidhan Sabha Elections of 2018, all the vehicles of the School were taken by the Government for election purposes and key of the premises were handed over to accused Jitendra Sahu. It is also stated that at the time of recovery of the liquor, accused Jitendra Sahu was present.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. The total quantity of liquor was not recovered from the exclusive possession of the applicant as it was recovered from the School premises. The keys of the School were having with accused Jitendra Sahu, who was working as Watchman in the said School. Therefore, it cannot be said that the liqour has been recovered from the exclusive possession of the present applicant.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application. She submits that there are two criminal antecedents of the applicant bearing Crime No.513/2014 under Sections 294, 506, 323 of the IPC and Crime No.704/2016 under Sections 294, 484, 506/34 of the IPC. However, learned counsel submits that no offence under the Excise Act has been registered against the applicant.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and also considering that the seizure witnesses have turned hostile and the illicit liquor was not recovered from the exclusive possession of the present applicant and that the applicant is in jail since 12.2.2022 and there is no criminal antecedent of similar nature, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on regular bail.
7. Accordingly, the application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Along with the bail bonds, copies of the Aadhar Card and coloured Post Card full size photo shall also be submitted by the applicant as well as by the sureties, which shall be duly verified by the trial Court. He is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date given by the said Court.
8. Certified copy as per rules.
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.