Balvant Singh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

They are heard. Perused the case diary / challan pa- pers.

This second application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 has been filed by applicant, who is implicated in connection with Crime No.212/2012 registered at Police Station Jiran, District Neemuch (MP) for offence punishable under Section 34 (2) of the Madhya Pradesh Excise Act, 1915.

As per prosecution story, on the basis of source information, 56.5 bulk liters of liquor has been seized from the possession of the present applicant, for which he was not having any valid license. Hence, the present case has been registered against the applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and after his arrest in the said offence, his bail application was rejected by the trial Court as well as Sessions Court. Thereafter, the applicant moved an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before this Court and by order dated 22.05.2014 passed in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.2723/2014 the applicant was granted bail. Thereafter, he was regularly appearing before the trial Court. However, on 30.09.2019 he could not mark his presence before the trial Court. Therefore non bailable warrant of arrest was directed to be issued against him. After receiving information about issuance of non bailable warrant of arrest, the applicant surrendered before the trial Court on 10.12.2019 and moved an application for cancellation of warrant and grant of bail. However, the same was rejected by the trial Court on 10.12.2019; and since then he is in custody. His bail application has also been rejected by 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Neemuch on 12.12.2019. It is also submitted that after completion of the trial, case was posted for pronouncement of the judgment on 14.01.2020. However, trial Court has come to the conclusion that three important prosecution witnesses have not been examined. Therefore, the said witnesses have been recalled; and now the case is again posted for prosecution witnesses. Under these circumstances, there is no possibility of early conclusion of the trial. Learned counsel for the applicant assured that in future, the applicant will regularly mark his presence before the trial Court. To show his bona fide, learned counsel for the applicant proposed that the applicant is ready to deposit Rs.5,000/- from his previous personal bond. Under these circumstances, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant / State of Madhya Pradesh submits that no sufficient ground is made out for releasing the applicant on bail, hence the application filed by the applicant be dismissed.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, but without commenting on the merits of the case, the application filed by the applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail subject to depositing an amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) from his previous personal bond and upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he / she shall remain present before the court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.