High CourtsSingle Bench

Abhishek @ Rahul vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 6 January 2020 · Citation: (2020) 01 MP CK 0005

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.K. Awasthi, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438, 438(2) · Madhya Pradesh Excise Act, 1915 — Section 34(2) · Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 27
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 54354 Of 2019
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 402 words

They are heard. Perused the case diary.

This first application under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for grant of anticipatory bail has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.818/2019 registered at Police Station Heera Nagar, Indore District Indore (MP) for offence punishable under Section 34 (2) of the Madhya Pradesh Excise Act, 1915.

As per prosecution story, on 11.12.2019, upon secret information, Police Heera Nagar, Indore has seized 27 boxes of Foreign and Country made liquor from the possession of co-accused Navin in Auto Rickshaw and seized illicit liquor wroth Rs.1,13,300/-; and upon his disclosure statement, the present applicant has been made as an accused in the present case.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent; he has falsely been implicated in the present crime; and he is not having any past criminal antecedents. No liquor has been recovered from the possession of the present applicant and he has been implicated in the present crime only on the basis of disclosure statement of co-accused Navin recorded under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which is not a legal evidence. He further submitted that the applicant is ready to cooperate with the investigation and there is no possibility of his absconsion or tampering with the evidence, if enlarged on anticipatory bail. Under these circumstances, learned counsel prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant / State of Madhya Pradesh opposed the bail; and prayed for rejection of the anticipatory bail application.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, but without commenting anything on the merits of the matter, I deem it proper to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, this application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant Abhishek @        Rahul s/o Dinesh Rathore shall be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand only) and furnishing one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer (Investigating Officer).

The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer, as and when required. He shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in Sub Section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Accordingly, Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.54354/2019 stands allowed.