Allowed

Smt. Punni Bai v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC14 Nov 2017MCRC/6977/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed bail to a woman prosecuted for illicit liquor possession (30 bulk liters) under the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. Despite the quantity exceeding the limit, consideration of detention duration and false implication led to release on personal bond and surety.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant released on regular bail upon providing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- and one surety, subject to standard conditions.

Smt. Punni Bai Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 6977 of 2017

¶5

Smt. Punni Bai, Wd/o Late Mohar Das Bhardwaj, aged about 45 years, R/oVillage Latuwa, Police Station City Kotwali, Baloda Bazar, District Baloda Bazar, Bhatapara, C.G.

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station City Kotwali, Baloda Bazar, District- Baloda Bazar, Bhatapara, C.G.

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

For Applicant : Mr. T.K. Jha, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. Ashish Surana, Panel Lawyer.

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal

Order On Board

14/11/17

Heard.

(1) The accused/applicant has moved this bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing her on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 444/2017 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Baloda Bazar, District- Baloda Bazar, Bhatapara, for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915.

¶16

(2) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that 30 bulk liters of illicit liquor was seized by the police from the present applicant.

¶17

(3) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been

¶18

¶19

falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that the as the applicant is in custody since 17.10.2017 and the trial is likely to take some time for its final disposal, he may be released on bail.

¶20

(4) On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application.

¶21

(5) I have heard the counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶22

(6) Taking into consideration the condition incorporated in Section 59-A(ii) of the C.G. Excise Act, 1915, and bearing in mind the principles of law laid down in Banti Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh (M.Cr.C. No.6846 of 2014, decided on 05.01.2015), if the facts of present case are examined, it is apparent that only 30 bulk liters of illicit liquor has been seized from her which is more than prescribed limit of 5 bulk liters, but looking to the fact that the applicant is in custody since 17.10.2017, case is triable by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, trial is likely to take some more time and further taking into account the nature and gravity of offence and plea raised by the applicant that she has falsely been implicated in case, I am of the opinion that present is the fit case, in which, the applicant should be enlarged on regular bail.

¶23

(7) Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is directed that on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court for his appearance as and when directed, the applicant shall be released on bail, subject to following conditions:

¶24

¶25

That, the applicant shall furnish a specific undertaking that while on bail, she will not commit any excise offence, otherwise bail granted to her shall be liable to be cancelled and shall co-operate with investigation / trial.

¶26

That, the accused/applicant shall make herself available for interrogation before the concerned Investigating Officer as and when required and the accused/applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

¶27

That, the accused/applicant shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial.

¶28

Certified copy, as per rules.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge

¶31

Priyanka

Smt. Punni Bai v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Punni Bai 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajendrapal Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Mukesh Rathore Vs Kamli Bai @ Kammu and Ors.

Kanoi Paper and Industries Ltd. Vs C.S.E.B. and Ors.

Srijan Awasthi Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Bhagirathi and Anr. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Mohar Sai @ Motu Vs The State Of Chhattisgarh