Court allowed bail for applicant Vinod Yadav in a case involving spurious liquor manufacture charges despite lack of chemical report and co-accused already on bail.
Released on bail subject to personal bond and two sureties with standard conditions including no tampering with witnesses.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48416 of 2021
Applicant :- Vinod Yadav @ Manoj Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bipin Kumar Tripathi,Ashok Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
In view of the guidelines laid down by this Court, the urgent bail applications have been directed to be heard through Video Conferencing.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant through Video Conferencing as well as learned AGA for the State.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 262 of 2021, under Section- 60, 62, 72 of Excise Act and Sections- 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 272 IPC & Section- 103, 104 Trade Mark Act, Police StationRamkola, District- Kushi Nagar with a prayer to enlarge him on bail.
While pressing the present application for bail, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was used to park his vehicle i.e. Bolero in Madarsa, in issue, in which, as per the allegations made in the FIR, spurious liquor was manufactured. Co-accused Irshad, who is the owner of Madarsa has already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 23.12.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 47874 of 2021. It is stated that the applicant has been implicated in this case being close friend of owner of Madars namely Irshad. It is also stated that no offence, as alleged in the FIR, is made out against the applicant. In the FIR, there is no ingredient related to Sections 272, 467, 468, 471 IPC. It is further stated that as per the allegations made in the FIR, the alleged recovery from the possession of the applicant is of spirit and the prosecution has failed to prove its case related to manufacturing of spurious liquor, in regard to which, there is no chemical report and as such, Section 272 IPC is not attracted against the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 25.08.2021. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
On the basis of the instructions received, learned AGA could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the case. However, he opposed the prayer for bail.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted herein above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Vinod Yadav @ Manoj Kumar Yadav , involved in aforesaid Case Crime Number be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 3.1.2022
Arun/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in a case involving offences under the Excise Act and IPC.
Vinod Yadav @ Manoj Kumar Yadav
Saurabh Lavania
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
