Raju Kumar Devangan v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Page No.1 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.CR.C. No. 6674 of 2016 Raju Kumar Devangan, S/o. Ganeshram Devangan, age about 32 years, R/o. Ward No.24 Subhash Nagar Mahasamund, Thana/Tahsil and District - Mahasamund (C.G.) ---- Applicant

Versus

The State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Station House Officer, Police Station - Mahasamund, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) ---- Respondent For Applicant :

Mr. Vikash Pradhan, Advocate For Respondent :

Mr. U.S. Chandel, Panel Lawyer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 26/10/2016 1.

This is the second bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 325/2016, registered at Police Station- Mahasamund, District - Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. The first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh after examination of the seizure witness vide order dated 16.08.2016.

2.

The prosecution alleges that on a raid being conducted, the applicant was found to be in possession of illicit liquor measuring about 12.960 liters and he was arrested on 28.06.2016.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is second bail application and the first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to repeat the same after examination of the seizure

Page No.2 witnesses and now the seizure witnesses namely Vikky Sahu and Raj Chauhan have been examined and they have not supported the case of the prosecution; therefore, the counsel prays that the applicant may be released on bail.

4.

Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail, however, he is not able to dispute the fact that seizure witnesses in this case have not supported the case of the prosecution. 5.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that seizure witness in this case have been examined and they have not supported the case of the prosecution, this Court is of the opinion that present is a fit case, in which, the applicant should be enlarged on regular bail.

6.

Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed.

7.

It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Remand Court, for his appearance as and when directed.

8.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge Balram