Allowed

Bhanu Kumar Ugre v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC8 Nov 2016MCRC/6839/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed the bail application under Section 439 CrPC for the petitioner accused under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. Considering the small quantity of seized liquor and the fact that the offence is triable by a JMFC, the court directed his release on personal bond.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail with a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and one surety in the like sum.

Bhanu Kumar Ugre Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Corruption | Chhattisgarh HC (2016)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

MCRC No. 6839 of 2016

¶4

Bhanu Kumar Ugre S/o Shri Jagdish Ugre Aged About 27 Years Occupation- Labour, R/o Village Bheekhapali, Thana & Tahsil Saraypali, Civil & Revenue District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Saraypali, Civil & Revenue District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent

¶7

For the applicant : Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Anant Bajpai, Panel Lawyer

¶8

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri

¶9

Order on Board

¶10

08.11.2016

¶11

This is an application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking grant of regular bail to the applicant in connection with Crime No. 271 of 2016 registered at P.S. Saraypali, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act.

¶12

The prosecution alleges that when a raid/inspection was conducted by the Police, 18 bulk litres of illegal liquor was seized from the possession of the applicant.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as no seizure was made in person from him. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 28.08.2016 and the alleged seizure having been made, no further investigation is necessary, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application. However, he is not able to show that earlier any

¶15

case of similar nature u/s 34(2) of the Excise Act was registered against the applicant.

¶16

Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances and the fact that the quantity of seized liquor in this case is only 18 bulk litres; offence is triable by the JMFC and the applicant is in jail since 28.08.2016 this Court is inclined to release him on bail. Accordingly, this application is allowed.

¶17

The applicant is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. He shall also appear before the said Court as and when directed by the said Court.

C.c. as per rules.

Sd/-

GOUTAM BHADURI JUDGE

R a o

Bhanu Kumar Ugre v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhanu Kumar Ugre v. State Of Chhattisgarh

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

Kishan Dewangan Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Rajendra Singh Arora Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Jayant Jaiswal Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Dr. Krishnapratap Pandey Vs Shri Anil Mundra

Sanjay Joshi Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Manjeet Kaur Vs State Of Chhattisgarh