Madhya Pradesh High Court
Prahlad Lodhi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr on 31 July, 2017
MCRC-8186-2017
(PRAHLAD LODHI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR)
31-07-2017
Shri Saket Udenia learned counsel for the applicants.
Shri R.K.Awasthi, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
These M.Cr.Cs have arisen out of one and the same crime number of the same police station, hence, they are taken up for analogous hearing and proposed to be decided by this common order.
Heard arguments.
Perused case diary and material on record.
These are the first bail applications filed by the applicants under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C for grant of bail in connection with the Crime No.45/2017 registered at Police Station Basai District Datia against them. As per the FIR and the case diary, the police registered a case against applicant Prahlad under Section 34 (2) of the M.P. Excise Act (for short `the Act') and 25 and 27 of the Arms Act whereas a case against applicant Gajadhar is registered under Section 34 (2) of the Act. The prosecution case is that on 29.6.2017 the police found in joint possession of both the applicants 110 bulk liters of hand made country liquor and in the course of police remand, the police recovered one country made fire arm with one live cartridge from the possession of applicant Prahlad.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicant Gajadhar and Prahlad are in custody in the case since 29.6.2017 and 12.7.2017 respectively and that the charge sheet had been filed. He submits that the applicants are falsely implicated in the case. He submits that it is not the case of the prosecution that the alleged seized liquor is unfit for human consumption. He submits that the case is triable by the Court of JMFC and the trial will take long time to conclude. He submits that this is the first ever criminal case registered against applicant Prahlad and that this is the second criminal case registered against applicant Gajadhar under the Act and that the earlier case was registered against him in the year 2012. Upon these submissions, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer mainly on the ground that the applicants have criminal antecedents. However, he concedes that criminal cases of minor offences under IPC are registered against the applicants.
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties by their counsel and quantity of the seized liquor from the joint possession of both the applicants and it being fit for human consumption, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicants deserve to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the applications are allowed. It is ordered that applicants Gajadhar Lodhi and Prahlad Lodhi be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the same amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned Court for their appearance on all such dates as may be fixed by it in the course of trial of the case. The applicants shall abide by all the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) of CrPC. In case of bail jump, the concerned Court will have power to cancel the applicants' bail. Certified copy as per rules.
(RAJENDRA MAHAJAN) JUDGE Rks