Sunil S/O Gowardhandas Panjwani v. The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Pso, Gadchiroli, Dist. Gadchiroli

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.

OF 2025 Sunil s/o Gowardhandas Panjwani Vs State of Maharashtra Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order Mr. K.S. Motwani, counsel for applicant.

Mr. M.J.Khan, APP for non-applicant/State.

CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.

DATED : 31/07/2025.

1.

Apprehending the arrest at the hands of police in connection with Crime No. 472 of 2025 registered with Police Station Gadchiroli for the offence punishable under sections 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 read with Section 65(a) of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949, the applicant approached this Court for grant of pre-arrest bail.

2.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the crime is registered on the basis of a report lodged by the police constable, on an allegation that when they were on patrolling duty, they received secret information that illicit liquor is to be transported from one CRETA vehicle. They immediately intercepted the vehicle, but the applicant, who was the owner and driver of the said vehicle, left the vehicle at the same place and fled away from the spot of incidence. During inspection of the said vehicle, the huge quantity of the

illicit liquor was found in the said vehicle. On the basis of the said report, police have registered the crime against the present applicant.

3.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, who submitted that considering that the entire stock is already recovered, the custodial interrogation of the present applicant is not required. Hence, he be released on anticipatory bail.

4.

Learned APP strongly opposed the said application and submitted that he is a habitual offender, as three similar types of the offences are registered against him. The prohibition is there with the purpose of curbing the activities of transporting the illicit liquor in the other areas. Though the applicant was released on bail for earlier offences, he contravened the terms and conditions imposed on him while releasing him on bail. In view of that, the application deserves to be rejected.

5.

On hearing both sides and on perusal of the investigation papers, it reveals that there are criminal antecedents of a similar nature. The transporting of the illicit liquor was prohibited in the said area. The Gadchiroli District has been completely liquor prohibited for more than 3 decades, and the applicant has contravened the same and attempted to transport the illicit liquor against the terms and conditions. It

further appears that there are three offences are registered of a similar nature. It is sufficient to show that he is a habitual offender. Moreover, on the day of the incident, after interception of the vehicle, he fled away from the spot of incident by causing the damage to the other vehicle.

In view of the above, the application deserves to be rejected. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order.

Criminal application is rejected.

[URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.]