High CourtsSingle Bench

Vimal And Another vs State Of M.P.

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 2 August 2021 · Citation: (2021) 08 MP CK 0028

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 437(3), 439 · Madhya Pradesh Excise Act, 1915 — Section 34(2) · Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 27
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.38116 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

26 paragraphs · 489 words

Anil Verma, J

1.

This is first application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the applicants for grant of bail. The applicants are implicated in connection

with Crime No.382/2021 registered at Police Station-Sendhwa Village, District-Barwani (MP) for offence punishable under Section 34(2) of M.P.

Excise Act. The applicants are in custody since 10.07.2021.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case-diary.

3.

As per prosecution story, on 18.06.2021 source information was received by the police that co-accused Bhaya is carrying liquor with him on his

unregistered motorcycle. On the said information, police laid a trap and reached on the spot. Co-accused Bhaya was intercepted and 54 bulk liters of

country made liquor was seized from his possession for which he did not offer any valid explanation. On the basis of the statement of co-accused

Bhaya, present applicants have been made accused in this offence.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. There is no

evidence against them and they did not have any kind of liquor. The involvement of the applicants has been shown merely on the basis of

memorandum under Section 27 of Evidence Act. He further submits that no recovery was made from the possession of the applicants and such

memorandum is not of evidentiary value. They are in custody since 10.07.2021 and there is no progress in the trial due to Covid-19 epidemic. He,

therefore, prayed for grant of bail.

5.

Per contra, learned learned government advocate for respondent â€" State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection by submitting that

the applicant â€" Lal Singh earlier also has been made accused in a criminal case under the Excise Act.

6.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also keeping in view the fact that trial will take considerable long time for its final

conclusion and no liquor was seized from the possession of the applicants, I deem it proper to release the applicant on bail.

7.

Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application filed by the applicants is allowed. The applicants are directed to be

released on bail upon their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand) each with one solvent surety of the like

amount each to the satisfaction of the trial Court for their regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that they 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.

8.

Before releasing the applicant from custody, the jail authorities are directed to medically examine him in order to rule out the possibility of COVID-

19 infections and shall comply with the direction given by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Writ Petition No.1/2020.

Certified copy as per rules.