High CourtsSingle Bench

Chhotu @ Dharmendra Lodhi vs State Of M.P

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 26 August 2021 · Citation: (2021) 08 MP CK 0173

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajeev Kumar Dubey, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Madhya Pradesh Excise Act, 1915 — Section 34(2) · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.41737 Of 2021
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

29 paragraphs · 547 words

Rajeev Kumar Dubey, J

This is first application filed under section 439 Cr.P.C. Applicant Chhotu @ Dharmendra Lodhi was arrested on 01.08.2021 in Crime No.187/2021

registered at Police Station Garhakota, District Sagar for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act.

As per prosecution case, on 03.06.2021, at around 6:00 PM on the information of informant, police stopped vehicle bearing Chassis

No.MA3EWB22SMD704961 and Engine No.K12MN762922 which was being driven by the co-accused Sunil Patel and seized 72 bulk liters of

country made liquor from the possession of co-accused Sunil Patel and Rajpal, which was illegally being carried by them in that car. It is alleged that

applicant Dharmendra @ Chhotu Lodhi and co-accused Laxminarayan @ Lucky Prajapati were also travelling in that car at the time of incident. They

fled away from the spot.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. There is no direct evidence on

record to connect the applicant with the crime. Police only on the basis of memorandum of co-accused persons Rajpal and Sunil implicated the

applicant in the crime while confessional statement given by the applicant and co-accused to the police cannot be accepted as legal evidence against

the applicant in the absence of any other incriminating piece of evidence. The applicant has been in custody since 01.08.2021, and the conclusion of

trial will take time, hence prayed for release of the applicant on bail.

In the police report it is mentioned that applicant was also involved in the crime, so he should not be released on bail.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the contention of learned counsel for the applicant and the fact that there is no direct evidence

on record to connect the applicant with the crime, police only on the basis of memorandum of co-accused persons implicated the applicant in the

crime, the applicant is in custody since 01.08.2021 and conclusion of trial will take time, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application

is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand

Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned C.J.M/trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court on all such

dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the trial Court during the pendency of trial.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :-

1.

The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

2.

The applicant will cooperate in the trial;

3.

The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to

dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

4.

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

5.

The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

6.

The applicant will not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court.

C.C. on payment of usual charges.