Madhya Pradesh High Court
Anuj vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 May, 2017
MCRC-6119-2017
(DAYA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
01-05-2017
Shri Pramod Kumar Chaurasia, learned counsel, for applicant Daya of
M.Cr.C. No.6119/2017.
Shri Anil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel, for applicant Anuj of M.Cr.C.
No.6452/2017.
Shri Sushil Kumar Dixit, learned counsel, for applicant Akram of M.Cr.C.
No.6520/2017.
Ms. Pratibha Mishra, learned Panel Lawyer, for the respondent-State.
Since the aforesaid M.Cr.Cs. have arisen out of one and the same crime number of the same police station, they are heard analogously and being decided by this common order. Perused case diary and material on record.
All the applicants have filed first time bail applications under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in connection with Crime No.65/2017 registered at Police Station Dhangaon of Khandwa district against them and co-accused persons namely, Mangilal and Vijay for the offences punishable under Sections 34(2) and 49A of the M.P. Excise Act (for short, "the Act").
According to the prosecution, on 29.3.2017, the applicants and both the co-accused persons were found transporting illegally each 72 bulk liters of liquor, which is allegedly unfit for human consumption, in a vehicle bearing Registration No.MP-09-HE-3493.
Learned counsels for the applicants submit that the applicants are in custody in the case since 28.3.2017 (applicant Daya), 29.3.2017 (applicant Anuj) and 3.4.2017 (applicant Akram). They submit that the applicants are falsely implicated in the case. They submit that this is the first ever criminal case registered against the applicants under the Act. They submit that the case is triable by the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class and that the trial will take long time to conclude. They submit that the applicants are permanent residents of Khandwa district and that they have no criminal antecedents. They submit that the FSL report regarding the chemical examination of the seized liquor is yet to be received. Therefore, at this stage, there is no evidence on record to hold that the seized liquor is unfit for human consumption. They submit that this court has granted temporary bail to the co-accused persons till the filing of the FSL report by the respondent-State and the case concerned with them is listed for final disposal in the week commencing from 8.5.2017. Upon these submissions, they pray for grant of bail to the applicants.
Learned Panel Lawyer opposes the prayer. However, he concedes that as per case diary the applicants have no criminal antecedents and that this is their first offence under the Act.
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions raised on behalf of the parties by their counsels and the quantity of seized liquor from the possession of each of the applicants, but without making any comments on merits of the case, I am of the view that applicants may be enlarged on temporary bail till the submission of the FSL report by the respondent-State before this court. It is, therefore, directed that each of applicants namely, Daya, Anuj and Akram be released on bail upon each of them executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/- (forty thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned for their appearances on all such dates as may be fixed by it untill further orders of this Court. The applicants shall abide by the conditions enumerated in Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C.
List the aforesaid M.Cr.Cs. with M.Cr.C. No.6061/2017 for analogous hearing in the week commencing from 8.5.2017.
Certified copy as per rules.
(RAJENDRA MAHAJAN) JUDGE ps