Allowed

Rakesh Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC7 Aug 2020MCRC/3792/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal allowed a bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The applicant, held in custody since June 1, 2020, was falsely implicated in a liquor seizure case where illicit liquor was found in the possession of a co-accused. The court granted regular bail.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted with a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- and one surety in the like sum.

Rakesh Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 3792 of 2020

¶5

Rakesh Yadav S/o Late Kaliram Yadav Aged About 46 Years R/o-Ward No. 11 Berla, Police Station & Tahsil-Berla, District-Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

¶6

---- Applicant
(In Jail)

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, P.S. Berla Revenue & Civil District- Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

For Applicant :- Mr. Keshav Prasad Gupta, Adv.
For State/Respondent :- Mr. Ravi Bhagat, Dy. G.A.

¶11

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

¶12

07/08/2020

¶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

¶15

connection with Crime No. 100/2020,

¶16

¶17

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

¶18

3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, 120.960 bulk liters of illicit liquor was seized by the police from the possession of co-accused namely Roshan Bhat.

¶19

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence. The illicit liquor was seized from the possession of co-accused namely Roshan Bhat and he has falsely been implicated in crime in question. He is in custody since 01/06/2020.

¶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 facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of offence, it is apparent that the illicit

¶23

¶24

liquor i.e. 120.960 bulk liters has not been
seized from the present applicant and he is
in custody since 01/06/2020, this Court is
of the opinion that present is a fit case,
in which, the applicant should be enlarged
on regular bail.

¶25

8. 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.

¶26

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 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

¶27

¶28

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.

¶29

10.Certified copy as per rules.

¶30

Sd/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal)
Judge

¶31

Ankit

Rakesh Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gajendra Kumar Vs Bishal Sharma and Others

Lagni Bai Vs Mansharam and Ors.

Anjuman Islamiya Committee, Nagri Vs President Nagar Panchayat,Nagri

Rajamma and Others Vs M/S. Raisons Engineers andCONTRACTORS

Smt. Prembati Goel Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Satnam Singh Vs Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited