High CourtsSingle Bench

Vikas Shivhare vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 13 June 2022 · Citation: (2022) 06 MP CK 0021

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sunita Yadav, 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. 16306 Of 2022
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

18 paragraphs · 547 words

Sunita Yadav, J

The applicant has filed this First application u/S 439, Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.

The applicant has been arrested by Police Station Veerpur, District Sheopur in connection with crime No. 05/2022 registered for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of Excise Act.

Prosecution story in brief is that on 10/01/2022, the police of police station Veerpur, District Sheopu tried to check the loading Bolero, at that time, the driver of the vehicle ran away with the vehicle. The said vehicle met with an accident. When the police searched the vehicle, 358.5 bulk litres of foreign liquor was found in the vehicle. The case was registered under section 34 (2) of Excise Act During investigation, it was found that applicant was driving the vehicle at the time of incident. The charge sheet has been filed after investigation against accused /applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated. He further argued that applicant is under custody since 07/03/2022. No liquor was seized from the custody of the applicant. It is further submitted that applicant was made accused only after lapse of three months. The applicant is permanent resident of District Morena. Conclusion of trial is likely to take time and there is no likelihood of his absconsion, if released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the application and prayed for its rejection.

Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case diary available on record.

Considering the custody period of the applicant, nature of the case as well as facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two local solvent sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/committal Court .

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/her;

2) The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

3) The applicant will not indulge himself/herself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

4) The applicant 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.

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

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

Learned State counsel is directed to send an e-copy of this order to the Station House Officer of the concerned Police Station for information and necessary action.

E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance, if possible, by the office of this Court.

Certified copy as per rules.