Govind Prasad Banjare v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 7074 of 2018 • Govind Prasad Banjare S/o Tijram Bajare Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Nagaradhih Police Station Chakarbhata Civil Revenu And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Chakarbhata District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent AND MCRC No. 6889 of 2018 • Narottam Maravi @ Batua Maravi S/o Shri Gendram Maravi Aged About 23 Years R/o Nagradih Police Station- Chakarbhata, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station- Chakarbhata, DistrictBilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent For Applicant (in MCRC 7074/2018) : Mr. Santosh Kumar Verma, Advocate For Applicant (in MCRC 6889/2018) : Ms. Jyoti Rathore, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Bhaskar Payashi, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Order on Board 29/10/2018 1.
Since both the cases arise out of same crime number, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order.
2.
The applicants have preferred these bail applications under Section
439 of the Cr.P.C for grant of regular bail as they are arrested in connection with Crime No. 228/2018 registered at Police StationChakarbhata, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34 (1)(F) & 34 (2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 3.
As per prosecution story, on 31-08-2018 on the basis of information received from an informant, police personnels raided in the house of applicant Govind Prasad Banjare (MCRC No. 7074/2018) and seized total 100 bulk litres of country made liquor and 140 kgs of Mahua from his possession and behind his house 100 bulk litres of country made liquor and 140 kgs of Mahua has been seized from applicant Narottam Maravi @ Batua Maravi (MCRC No. 6889) and they have been arrested on 31.08.2018.
4.
Learned Counsel for the applicants submit that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. They further submit that the applicants have no criminal antecedents, they are in custody since 31/08/2018 and trial will likely to take some time to conclude, therefore, they may be released on bail. 5.
Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail applications.
6.
I have heard learned counsel for both the parties. 7.
Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, the evidence collected by the prosecution and further considering the fact that the applicants have no criminal antecedents, they are in custody since 31.08.2018 and trial will likely to take some time to conclude, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to
release the applicants on bail.
8.
Accordingly, the bail applications are allowed. 9.
It is directed that the applicants shall be released on bail on each of them executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 40,000/- with two local solvent sureties each of Rs. 20,000/- to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for their appearance before the said Court as and when directed.
Sd/- (Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge Shubham