Allowed

Rajuram Dhavde v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC5 Oct 2021MCRC/7811/2021

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 under the Chhattisgarh Excise Act. Relying on the absence of criminal antecedents despite the quantity seized, the court directed their release upon furnishing a bail bond.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.25,000/- each with surety in like sum.

Rajuram Dhavde Vs the State of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 7811 of 2021

¶5

Rajuram Dhavde S/o Suklal Dhavde aged about 40 Years R/o Village Sivni, Thana Khadgaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.

¶6

Mansharam Dhavde S/o Late Chamar Singh Dhavde Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Sivni, Thana Khadgaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh

¶7

------Applicants

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

State of Chhattisgarh through: Police Station Bhanupratappur, District UB Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶10

------- Non-applicant

¶11

For Applicants : Ms. Bhavika Kotecha, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. K.K. Singh, G.A.

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

¶13

ORDER

¶14

05/10/2021

¶15

Applicants have filed this application under Section 439 of CrPC for grant of regular bail as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 180/2021 registered at Police Station Bhanupratappur, District U.B. Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of Chhattisgarh Excise Act.

¶16

Case of the prosecution is, that on 10.08.2021, based on the secret information, police intercepted motor cycle vehicle and during search 30 bulk litre of hand made liqour was seized from the possession of applicants. Based on it, aforementioned crime was registered against applicants and they were arrested.

¶17

Ms. Bhavika Kotecha, learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the crime. Applicants when travelling on the motor cycle from that road, police intercepted them, implicated them in the crime. She submits that applicants are having no other criminal antecedents against them. She further submits that the applicants were arrested by the police on

¶18

¶19

10.08.2021. When they were sent to jail, based on the order of high power committee, they were released on parole, hence, they may be enlarged on bail.

¶20

Mr. K.K. Singh, learned State counsel, while opposing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants, submits that looking to the quantity of liqour seized from the possession of applicants which they were carrying, they are not entitled for grant of bail. However, upon putting specific query with regard to any criminal antecedents of similar nature against applicant, upon going through case diary, he submits that there is no mention of any criminal antecedents against applicants in the case diary.

¶21

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶22

Taking into consideration, nature of allegation, submission of learned counsel for the State that in the case diary there is no mention of any other criminal antecedent of applicants, without commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to allow the bail application.

¶23

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicants shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that-

¶24

a) They shall appear before the Trial Court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance.

¶25

b) The applicants shall not, in any manner, tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶26

c) If the applicants are found involved in similar offence in the future, it will be open for the State to apply for cancellation of Bail.

¶27

Certified copy as per rules.

¶28

Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶29

Pawan

¶30

¶31

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶32

Order Sheet

¶33

MCRC No. 7811 of 2021

¶34

Rajuram Dhavde and another Versus State of Chhattisgarh

¶35

05.10.2021		Ms. Bhavika Kotecha, Advocate for applicants.
	today.	Mr. K.K. Singh, Government Advocate for the State. Heard. Admit. Learned State counsel submits that the case diary is available With the consent of parties, matter is heard finally. Order dictated and signed separately.
Pawan		Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

Rajuram Dhavde v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajuram Dhavde 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhupendra Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mahandra Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

R.N. Tiwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bhavesh Jha Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Pramod Kumar Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Arjun Jaiswal Vs State of Chhattisgarh