Allowed

Subal Chauhan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC9 Jul 2020MCRC/2437/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single Judge of the High Court of Chhattisgarh granted regular bail to the applicant, who was arrested for alleged possession of illicit liquor. Applying principles from precedent, the court held he was a fit case for bail as it was his first offence.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. allowed; applicant released on regular bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in an amount, subject to specified conditions.

Subal Chauhan Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Corruption | Chhattisgarh HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 2437 of 2020

¶5

Subal Chauhan S/o Hrishikesh Chauhan Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Netnagar, Tahsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh.

¶6

---- Applicant
(In Jail)

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh Through Thana InCharge Police Chowki Jute Mill, P.S. City Kotwali, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh.

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

For Applicant :- Mr. Rajendra Tripathi, Advocate.
For State/Respondent :- Mr. H.S. Ahluwalia, Dy.A.G.

¶11

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

¶12

09/07/2020

¶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 connection with Crime No. 324/2020, registered at Police Station-Police Chowki

¶15

¶16

Jute Mill, PS City Kotwali, District Raigarh

¶17

(CG), for the offence punishable under
Sections 34(1-a) (2), 59(A) of the

¶18

Chhattisgarh Excise Act.

¶19

3.Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that,
135.00 bulk liters of illicit liquor was

¶20

seized by the police from the present
applicant.

¶21

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 24/04/2020.

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

v. State of Chhattisgarh¹ , if the facts of

¶26

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

¶27

¶28

present case are examined, it is apparent
that there is no criminal antecedent of the
present applicant and only 135.00 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 it is the first offence of the
applicant and he is in custody since
24/04/2020 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,

¶29

I am of the opinion that present is the fit
case, in which, the applicant should be
enlarged on regular bail.

¶30

8.Accordingly, the bail application filed

¶31

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

¶32

¶33

released on bail, subject to following
conditions:

¶34

(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.

¶35

(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.

¶36

(iii) That, the accused/applicant shall not

¶37

act, in any manner, which will be
prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial.

¶38

9.It is made clear that if the applicant has
already been released on bail pursuant to
the bail bonds already furnished in view of

¶39

¶40

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.

¶41

10.Certified copy as per rules.

¶42

Sd/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal)
Judge

¶43

Ankit

Subal Chauhan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subal Chauhan 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

Ram Bai Vs Dhan Singh and Ors.

Leelawati Vs Somarsai and Others

Rukmani Bai Vs Hari Ram and Another

Dinesh @ Dikesh Kumar Bharti Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Khemraj @ Chhotu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sarvesh Manhar @ Konda @ Bablu Vs State of Chhattisgarh