Madhya Pradesh High Court
Chiragbhai vs State Of M.P. on 25 June, 2020
Author: Shailendra Shukla
Bench: Shailendra Shukla
1 MCRC-17537-2020
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-17537-2020
(CHIRAGBHAI Vs STATE OF M.P.)
3
Indore, Dated : 25-06-2020
Shri Manish Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant is present in
person through Video Conferencing.
Shri R. K. Jain, learned Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant -
State is present in person through Video Conferencing.
Learned counsel for the applicant has pointed out that this Court
had earlier also granted bail on the same facts in M.Cr.C.
No.5920/2019. This Court had also called for the copy of the charge-
sheet, which has not been supplied to this Court till date by the Public
Prosecutor and from last two occasions, copy of charge-sheet/final
report has not been supplied.
There have been two changes in the Public Prosecutors but none of
them have shown their concern by submitting copy of charge-sheet.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena and Shri Aditya Choudhary, learned Public
Prosecutors who were heard on 24.06.2020 be asked as to why despite
both having stated that they would be supplying copy of the charge-sheet,
have not supplied till today.
Shri R. K. Jain, learned Public Prosecutor has appeared and the
situation remains the same.
A copy of this order should be sent to the AAG who is expected to
see to it that the case does not come in rounds because of non-compliance
of the promise made by the Public Prosecutors.
Submissions have already been made in this bail application filed
under Section 439 of Cr.P.C, whereby the applicant - Chiragbhai S/o
Ramanbhai Padiyar is implicated in Crime No.80/2020 registered at
Police Station Sardarpur, District Dhar for the offence punishable under
2 MCRC-17537-2020
Section 34(2) of M. P. Excise Act and he is in custody since 19.03.2020.
Learned Public Prosecutor submits that he shall positively provide
copy of the charge-sheet by 26.06.2020. On receiving copy of charge-
sheet and after perusal of M.Cr.C. No.5920/2019, this Court shall
pronounce the order.
(SHAILENDRA SHUKLA)
JUDGE
gp
Later on :
Copy of the charge-sheet has been received on e-mail and
therefore, order is being passed.
As per prosecution story, pursuant to an information received on
13.02.2020by Police Station Sardarpur, District Dhar that an Eicher Truck bearing registration No.GJ 23 AT 0032 carrying boxes of liquor shall be coming from the side of Rajgarh towards Thanda. A trap was laid and when the aforesaid Eicher Truck was spotted, indication was given to stop the same but instead of stopping, the driver sped past barrier and abandoned the truck after sometime and fled into jungle. On search, it was revealed that there were 1096 boxes of Beer totalling to 13152 litres.
The present applicant is the registered owner of the truck however, learned counsel for the applicant submits that this vehicle had been sold 10 days earlier by a notarized document to one Ritesh and thus, vehicle was in complete control of Ritesh. The notarized document dated 04.02.2020 originally in Gujarati language is placed on record along with English translation of the same.
Learned counsel for the applicant has referred to an order dated 08.03.2019 passed by this Court in M.Cr.C. No.5920/2019, whereby in a 3 MCRC-17537-2020 similar case, when the registered owner had submitted agreement to sale in favour of another person, then the registered owner was given benefit of bail and on this ground, bail has been sought.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor for the State was also heard. Charge-sheet was perused. The memorandum of the applicant and that of Ritesh have been recorded and both of them have stated that the vehicle was given to Ritesh for using the same. This memorandum has been recorded on 18.03.2020. There is no word regarding agreement to sell the vehicle which as per the notarized document is of an earlier date (04.02.2020). The documents pertaining to agreement to sale is very proximate to the date of incident and moreover, not mentioning the factum of sale of vehicle by the applicant to Ritesh in his memorandum also weakens the defence of the applicant. In M.Cr.C. No.5920/2019, agreement to sale letter was 3 years earlier to the date of the incident.
In the present case, the driver and one another accused are still absconding and additional investigation is going on. the amount of liquor seized is huge (13152 litres) and therefore, bail cannot be granted to the applicant. The application for grant of bail filed by the applicant stands dismissed accordingly.
(SHAILENDRA SHUKLA) JUDGE gp Digitally signed by Geeta Pramod Date: 2020.06.26 15:40:03 +05'30'