Ranjeet Singh Bhatiya v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.Cr.C.
No.
of 201 Ranjeet Singh Bhatiya, S/o Shri Harjindar Singh, aged about 32 years, R/o Ward No.15 - Behind Dena Bank, Guru Govind Singh Ward Kharora, Tahsil Kharora, District Raipur (C.G.) ---- Applicant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station Arang, District Raipur (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Purnima Singh, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Dheeraj Wankhede, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board / 11 /201 Heard.
(1) The accused/applicant has moved this bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 111/2017 registered at Police Station Arang, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915. (2) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that 12.600 bulk liters of illicit liquor was seized by the police from the present applicant. (3) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question and similarly situated coaccused namely Ramesh Sahu has already been granted bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. No.1981/2017 decided on 11.04.2017. He further
submits that the as the applicant is in custody since 26.02.2017 and the trial is likely to take some time for its final diposal, he may be released on bail.
(4) On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application.
(5) I have heard the counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.
(6) Taking into consideration the condition incorporated in Section 59A(ii) of the C.G. Excise Act, 1915, and bearing in mind the principles of law laid down in Banti Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh (M.Cr.C. No.6846 of 2014, decided on 05.01.2015), if the facts of present case are examined, it is apparent that only 12.600 bulk liters of illicit liquor has been seized from him which is more than prescribed limit of 5 bulk liters, but looking to the fact that the applicant is in custody since 26.02.
2017, case is triable by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, trial is likely to take some more time and further taking into account the nature and gravity of offence and plea raised by the applicant that he has falsely been implicated in case, I am of the opinion that present is the fit case, in which, the applicant should be enlarged on regular bail. (7) Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is directed that on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.
granted to him shall be liable to be cancelled and shall co-operate the prosecution during trial.
• That, the accused/applicant shall make himself available for interrogation before the concerned Investigating Officer as and when required and the accused/applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. • That, the accused/applicant shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. Certified copy, as per rules.
Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Amita