Deepak Jain And Others vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J

Case diary is perused.

Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.

The applicants have filed this first application u/S. 439, Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.

T he applicants have been arrested on 08.05.2022 by Police Station Sultanganj, District Raisen (M.P.), in connection with Crime No.69/2022 registered in relation to the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act.

According to the prosecution case, on an information given by an informer, the police reached at the spot and seized 99 bulk ltr. of country made liquor from the joint possession of the applicants, for which they did not possess any valid licence. On the basis of the aforesaid, crime has been registered.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. They are innocent. They are in custody since 08.05.2022. Offence is triable by JMFC. Disposal of the matter will take long time. Applicant No.1 is permanent resident of District Sagar and applicant No.2 is permanent resident of District Tikamgarh (M.P.) and there is no likelihood of their absconsion or tampering with the prosecution evidence and they are ready to abide by the terms and conditions as may be imposed. With the aforesaid submissions, prayer for grant of bail is made out.

Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State opposed the application contending that on the basis of the allegations and material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out. It is further submitted that the applicant No. 1 is having history of 8 criminal cases and applicant No.2 is having history of 3 criminal cases. On these grounds, he prays for its rejection.

However, it would not be desirable to enter into the merits of the rival contentions at this juncture.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the fact that the trial is not likely to conclude in near future and prolonged pre-trial detention being an anathema to the concept of liberty, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicants.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicants be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the trial Court/committal Court for their appearance on the dates given by the concerned Court.

T h e applicants shall also furnish a written undertaking before the concerned court that they will abide by the terms and conditions of various circulars, as well as, orders issued by the Central Government, State Government and local administration from time to time such as maintaining social distancing, physical distancing, hygiene etc. to avoid proliferation of Corona virus.

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

The applicants will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by them;

The applicants will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

The applicants will not indulge themselves in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

4 . The applicants shall not commit any other offence during pendency of the trial, failing which this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically, without further reference to the Bench;

The applicants will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;

and

The applicants will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

A copy of this order be sent to the trial court concerned for compliance.

Certified copy as per rules.