Allowed

Radheshyam Nishad v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC22 Mar 2022MCRC/1903/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed a bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. by an applicant arrested for illegal possession of country-made liquor under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act.

What did the court decide?

Enlargement of the applicant on bail upon furnishing one solvent surety for Rs. 25,000/- and one personal bond in the like sum to the trial Court.

Radheshyam Nishad Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Service and Employment | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 1903 of 2022

¶5

Radheshyam Nishad S/o Shyamlal Nishad, Aged About 55 Years R/o Jamrao, Thana Amleshwar, Tehsil Patan, District Durg Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

For Applicant - Shri Avinash Chand Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent/State - Shri Amit Singh Chauhan, Panel Lawyer.

¶11

Hon'ble Justice Shri N.K. Chandravanshi

¶12

Order on Board

¶13

22-03-2022

¶14

Heard.

¶15

The applicant has preferred the first bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.04/2022, registered at Police Station-Amleshwar, District – Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act.

¶16

As per the prosecution story, on 06-01-2022, applicant has been found in illegal possession of 5.400 bulk liters of country made liquor.

¶17

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is in custody since 06-01-2022. He further

¶18

¶19

submits that no seizure memo has been made from the applicant, hence, the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶20

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State oppose the bail application filed by the applicant. He further submits that as per case diary, there is one criminal antecedent for the similar nature of offence has been shown against the applicant, hence, his bail application is liable to be rejected.

¶21

Considered the submissions and perused the case diary.

¶22

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case nature and gravity of offence, quantity of seized liquor from the possession of applicant and also the period of detention of the applicant, I feel inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶23

Accordingly, the present bail application is allowed. It is directed that if the applicant furnishes one solvent surety for a sum of Rs.25,000/- along with one personal bond in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned for his appearance before the concerned Court as and when directed by the said Court, he be released on bail.

¶24

SD-

¶25

(N.K. Chandravanshi)

¶26

Judge

¶27

Amardeep

Radheshyam Nishad v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Radheshyam Nishad 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

Ramesh Rathore Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Suresh Kumar Anant Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rikhiram Rahangdale (Pawar) Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kunal Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Madhukar Dubey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vijay Sao Vs State of Chhattisgarh