Allowed

Karanlal Sonkar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC11 Dec 2019MCRC/7740/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court bail application is considered under Section 439 CrPC for an offense under the C.G. Excise Act involving illicit liquor seizure. The court grants regular bail subject to conditions, noting the applicant's false implication claim and existing custody.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on regular bail requiring a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum.

Karanlal Sonkar Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

M.Cr.C. No. 7740 of 2019

¶5

Karanlal Sonkar, son of Shri Khorbahara, aged about 60 years, resident of village Mohtara, P.S. Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh Through : Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.).

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

For Applicant For Respondent

¶11

: Shri Ashok Dixit, Advocate. : Shri V.K. Agrawal, P.L.

¶12

Hon'ble Smt Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board

¶13

11/12/2019

¶14

The accused/applicant has moved this bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No.471/2019 registered at Police Station Masturi, Civil & Revenue District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 34(2) and 59(a) of the C.G. Excise Act, 1915.

¶15

It is the case of the prosecution that 11.00 bulk liters of illicit country made liquor (Mahuwa) was seized by the police from the custody of applicant and thereby committed the offence.

¶16

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that as the applicant is in custody since 08.11.2019 and the trial is likely to take some time for its final disposal, he may be released on bail.

¶17

¶18

On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the bail application.

¶19

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 11.00 bulk liters of illicit liquor has been seized from him which is more than prescribed limit of 5 bulk liters, but looking to the fact that the applicant is in custody since 08.11.2019, 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 he 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.

¶20

Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is directed that on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- 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:

¶21

That, the applicant shall furnish a specific, undertaking that while on bail, he will not commit any excise offence, otherwise bail granted to him shall be liable to be cancelled and shall co-operate the prosecution during trial.

¶22

That, the accused/applicant shall make himself available for interrogation before the concerned

¶23

¶24

Investigating OfÏcer 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 ofÏcer.

¶25

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

¶26

Certified copy, as per rules.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

(Rajani Dubey) Judge

¶29

Pekde

Karanlal Sonkar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karanlal Sonkar 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

Manoj Kumar Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Laxmi Prasad Vishwakarma Vs Smt. Shakuntala Singh Vishwakarma and Others

Sanjay Kumar Jangde Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jay Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Saroj Kumar Linjhare Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Hemulal Satnami Vs State of Chhattisgarh