Allowed

Rahul Sikarwar & Anr. v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC21 Sept 2020MCRC/1843/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh granted regular bail to two applicants arrested for Possession of illicit liquor and Arms. Applying Banti Singh principles, the Court noted they were first-time offenders in a first-class magistrate triable case and ordered their release on bail with conditions preventing further excise offences.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicants released on bail upon furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- each with one surety and complying with specific conditions.

Rahul Sikarwar & Anr. Vs the State of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 1843 of 2020

¶5

1. Rahul Sikarwar S/o Late Shri Ramswaroop Sikarwar Aged About 35 Years R/o Housing Board Colony, Industries Area, Bhilai, Thana Jamul, District Durg Chhattisgarh.

¶6

2. Ranjeet Singh @ Raju S/o Late Shri Pyara Singh Aged About 34 Years R/o Fish Market, Khurshipar, Thana Khurshipar, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh.

¶7

---- Applicants

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Chhattisgarh, through Station House Officer of Police Station Mahasamund District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

¶10

---- Respondent

¶11

For Applicants :- Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate.
For State/Respondent :- Mr. Animesh Tiwari, Dy. A.G.

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board

¶13

21/09/2020

¶14

1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken up through video conferencing.

¶15

2. This is an application filed under Section

¶16

¶17

439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail
to the applicants, who have been arrested in
connection with Crime No. 111/2020,
registered at Police Station-Mahasamund,
District Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offences
punishable under Section 34(2) of the
Chhattisgarh Excise Act & Sections 25, 27 of
the Arms Act.

¶18

3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, 160.38 bulk liters of illicit liquor, cash and a knife were seized by the police from the present applicants.

¶19

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have not committed any offences and they have falsely been implicated in crime in question. They are in custody since 03/03/2020.

¶20

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

¶21

6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶22

7. Taking into consideration the condition

¶23

¶24

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 Chhattisgarh1, if the facts of
present case are examined, it is apparent
that there is no criminal antecedent of the
present applicants and 160.38 bulk liters of
illicit liquor along with cash and a knife
have been seized from them which is more
than prescribed limit of 5 bulk liters, but

¶25

looking to the fact that it is the first
offence of the applicants and they are in
custody since 03/03/2020 and case is triable
by the Judicial Magistrate First Class and

¶26

trial is likely to take some more time and
further taking into account the nature and
gravity of offence and plea raised by the
applicants that they have falsely been
implicated in case, I am of the opinion that
present is the fit case, in which, the
applicants should be enlarged on regular
bail.

¶27

8.Accordingly, the bail application filed

¶28

1 2015(2) C.G.L.J. 341

¶29

¶30

under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed.
It is directed that on furnishing a personal
bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one
surety in the like sum to the satisfaction
of the concerned Court for their appearance
as and when directed, the applicants shall
be released on bail, subject to following
conditions:

¶31

(i) That, the applicants shall furnish a
specific undertaking that while on bail,
they will not commit any excise offence,
otherwise bail granted to them shall be
liable to be cancelled and shall co-operate
the prosecution during trial.

¶32

(ii) That, the accused/applicants shall make
themselves available for interrogation
before the concerned Investigating Officer
asandwhenrequiredandthe

¶33

accused/applicants 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 them
from disclosing such facts to the Court or

¶34

¶35

to any police officer.

¶36

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

¶37

9. It is made clear that if the applicants have already been released on bail pursuant to the bail bonds already furnished in view of the order passed by the High Power Committee constituted in compliance of the order of the Supreme Court of India dated 23/03/2020 in the matter of In Re : Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in Prisons (Suo Moto Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020), they need not furnish bail bonds afresh and the bail bonds already furnished shall be deemed to be the bail bonds furnished in compliance of the order of this Court, but if they have not furnished the bail bonds earlier, then they will be required to furnish bail bonds.

¶38

10. Certified copy as per rules.

¶39

Sd/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal)
Judge

¶40

Ankit

Rahul Sikarwar & Anr. v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Sikarwar & Anr. v. the 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

Pankesh Janardan Colambe and Anr. Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Pratyush Kumar Pradhan & Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sujeet Kumar Raghav & Anr. Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Niraj @ Jigar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jittu Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gupto Nag and Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh