Allowed

Ramlalan Sham Tiwari and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC29 Jun 2011APPLN/1687/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding a fake cheating case involving removal of chemicals for illicit liquor, the High Court at Aurangabad granted bail conditioned on surety and restriction on leaving the jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicants released on bail upon furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000 and solvent surety of like amount from Beed District.

Ramlalan Sham Tiwari and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra — Income Tax | Bombay HC (2011)

¶1

1 Cri.A.1687.11

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1687 OF 2011

¶4

Ramlalan S/o Sham Tiwari, Age : 48 Years, Occup.Driver, R/o Gond, Safipur, Sultannagar, Govara (Uttarpradesh)

¶5

Valji @ Sanjot S/o Devji /Devshibai Wankar, Age : 40 Years, Occup. : Labour, R/o 20, Dalitwas Area, Moti Khawdi, Jamnagar (Gujrath)

¶6

3.; Babubhai S/o Karsanbhai Goyal, Age : 50 Years, Occup.: Driver, R/o Bhatiya Dharamshal, Tq. Jamjodhpur, District Jamnagar (Gujrath) ...APPLICANTS.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

The State of Maharashtra, ...RESPONDENT.

¶9

... Smt Sadhana S.Jadhav,Advocate for Applicants. Shri.B.J.Sonwane, A.P.P. for Respondent. ... CORAM: T.V.NALAWADE, J. DATE : 29TH JUNE, 2011.

¶10

PER COURT :

¶11

This application is filed for bail, in Crime No. 44 of 2011, registered with Gevrai Police Station, Tq. Gevrai, District Beed for the offence

¶12

2 Cri.A.1687.11

¶13

punishable under sections 259, 285,467, 468 and 471 the Indian Penal Code and also under sections 3,7 of the Essential Commodities Act and under Section 65 of the Essential Services Act. 1999.

¶14

APP has made available the papers of investigation. APP submitted that Sessions Court has already made order in respect of releasing three tankers in favour of the owners, subject to conditions that they shall produce the receipts in respect receiving the chemical from the factories where they intend to reach. Advocate for the applicants submitted that they are drivers and cleaners and they are ready to abide any condition that may be imposed by this Court. The Advocate for the applicants submitted that they are behind bar from last four months, so bail needs to be granted.

¶15

Papers of investigation show that on the basis of information received by the Police they went to “Sai Prabha Dhaba within the area of Georai on Beed Aurangabad High way. Present applicants were present with three tankers and the tankers contains some chemicals. They noticed that it was chemical substance, which was being removed and this substance was used for preparation of illicit liquor. It was submitted that Dhaba owner and other accused were released on bail, on 08.04.2011. C.A.Report of in respect of Chemical is not received yet. The Police have not filed the

¶16

3 Cri.A.1687.11

¶17

report against the owners of the tankers and police did not make the owners of the tankers as accused. There are allegations against present applicants that they were removing substance from the tankers and it was used for preparation of illicit liquor. At this Advocate of the applicant submitted that one Ajaykumar Malhotra is already made accused, who is owner of one tanker.

¶18

In view of the aforesaid circumstance, this Court holds that applicants can be granted bail subject to conditions that they shall not leave the jurisdiction of Beed District, without prior permission of the Judicial Magistrate F.C., where the case is filed/pending and they shall furnish the solvent surety from Beed District itself. Hence following order-

¶19

(i) The application is allowed.

¶20

(2) The applicants in Crime No. 44 of 2011, registered with Gevrai Police Station, Tq. Gevrai, District Beed for the offence punishable under sections 259, 285, 467, 468 and 471 the Indian Penal Code and also under sections 3, 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and under Section 65 of the Essential Services Act. 1999, be released on bail on their furnishing PB Rs. 25,000/-

¶21

4 Cri.A.1687.11

¶22

(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) and solvent surety of like amount ( From Beed District itself ) each, on conditions that-

¶23

(a) The applicants shall not leave the jurisdiction of Beed District without prior permission of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, where the case is filed/pending.

¶24

(b) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses .

¶25

Sd/[ T.V.NALAWADE, J.]

¶26

MTK

Ramlalan Sham Tiwari and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramlalan Sham Tiwari and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamalben Purushottam Patil Vs the State of Mah

Dinkar Bhivrao Dhapate Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Suresh Sukhdev Auchar Vs the State of Mahrashtra

Dr. Vinayanand Bhanudas Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shivaji Bapurao Yadav and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Devram @ Deorao Bajirao Shende Vs the State of Maharashtra