Allowed

Jittu Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC21 Sept 2020MCRC/1882/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed a bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for the applicant, arrested for possessing illicit liquor. The court relied on Banti Singh balancing lack of antecedents and procedural grounds against the nature of the offense, granting bail with specific conditions including a personal bond and undertakings not to commit further excise offenses.

What did the court decide?

Bail application allowed; applicant released on personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one surety of like sum, undertaking not to commit excise offences and to cooperate with trial.

Jittu Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 1882 of 2020

¶5

Jittu Yadav S/o Shriram Yadav Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Lakhmanpur, Bhatapara, Chuikhadaan, P.S. Chuikhadaann, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Outpost Mohra, P.S. Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

For Applicant :- Mr. B.P. Singh, Advocate.
For State/Respondent :- Mr. Ayaz Naved, G.A.

¶11

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

¶12

21/09/2020

¶13

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

¶14

2.This is an application filed under Section
439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail
to the applicant, who has been arrested in
connectionwith Crime No. 41/2020,

¶15

¶16

registered at Police Station-Dongargarh,
District Rajnandgaon (CG), for the offence
punishable under Section 34(2) of the
Chhattisgarh Excise Act.

¶17

3.Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that,
225.000 bulk liters of illicit liquor was
seized by the police from the two accused
persons but one other accused person ran
away and the present applicant was arrested.

¶18

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has falsely been implicated in crime in question. He is in custody since 21/01/2020.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

7. 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

¶22

¶23

v. State of Chhattisgarh1, if the facts of
present case are examined, it is apparent
that there is no criminal antecedent of the
present applicant and other accused person
ran away and only 225.000 bulk liters of
illicit liquor has been seized from the
present applicant and which is more than
prescribed limit of 5 bulk liters, but
looking to the fact that the illicit liquor
was not seized from the present applicant
and he is in custody since 21/01/2020 and
case is triable by the Judicial Magistrate
First Class and 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.

¶24

8. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is directed that on furnishing a personal

¶25

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

¶26

¶27

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:

¶28

(i) 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.

¶29

(ii) That, the accused/applicant shall make
himself 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.

¶30

(iii) That, the accused/applicant shall not

¶31

act, in any manner, which will be

¶32

¶33

prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial.

¶34

9.It is made clear that if the applicant has

¶35

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), he 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 he has not furnished
the bail bonds earlier, then he will be
required to furnish bail bonds.

¶36

10.Certified copy as per rules.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

(Sanjay K. Agrawal)
Judge

¶39

Ankit

Jittu Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jittu Yadav 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

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

Rahul Sikarwar & Anr. Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Niraj @ Jigar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gupto Nag and Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh