Allowed

Lavlesh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Jun 2021BAIL/22195/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In bail application No. 22195 of 2021, the Allahabad High Court enlarged the accused on bail in a liquortrafficking case. The court relied on Dataram Singh and imposed standard conditions, noting heavy case pendency and the applicant's long detention without early trial prospects.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail upon executing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court.

Lavlesh Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 44 AFR

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22195 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Lavlesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ranjeet Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶6

Applicant has moved the present bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No. 114 of 2021, under Section 60, 63 U.P. Excise Act and Section 272 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Karwi District Chitrakoot.

¶7

As per the prosecution story as alleged in the F.I.R. dated 22.3.2021, when the police personnel were on the duty of checking in their area, huge quantity of illicit liquor about 15 litre containing 1 Gallon along with salt, chemical like urea etc. were recovered from the possession of the applicant. The applicant and other co-accused were arrested on the spot by the police personnel.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. There is no allegation in the F.I.R. that any person died while consuming the said liquor. He further submits that the police with malafide intention has been regularly lodging F.I.Rs. against those persons, who have either caught or being seen nearby some places where the country made liquor is being sold by the Government license holders.

¶9

He further submits that the whole prosecution story is false and concocted. The applicant has neither been arrested from the alleged spot nor any illegal material has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. The recovery memo is totally false. He further submits that no offence under any Section of I.P.C. is made out. The offence does not cover beyond the offence of the Excise Act. Thus, the prosecution case does not go beyond the purview of the Excise Act.

¶10

Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to

¶11

the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It has also been pointed out that the accused is not having any criminal history and he is in jail since 23.3.2021 and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶13

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of UP and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶14

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant Lavlesh involved in Case Crime No. 114 of 2021, under Section 60, 63 U.P. Excise Act and Section 272 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Karwi District Chitrakoot be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :-

¶16

(1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

¶17

(2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date fixed in the court below and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice.

¶18

(3) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶19

(4) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶20

(5)The party shall file computer generated copy of such order

¶21

downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad or certified copy issued from the Registry of the High Court, Allahabad.

¶22

(6) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶23

It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.

¶24

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶25

Order Date :- 9.6.2021 SP

¶26

Digitally signed by Justice Shamim Ahmed Date: 2021.06.15 13:41:54 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Lavlesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lavlesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Keshao Kant Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Naushad Vs State of U.P.

Shahid Vs State of U.P.

Ram Prakash Vs State of U.P.

Rinkaj Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Amir @ Bhola Vs State of U.P.