logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 MPHC 347 print Preview print Next print
Court : High Court of Madhya Pradesh
Case No : `MISC. Criminal Case No. 46256 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT LAHOTI
Parties : Veerendra Singh Pal Versus The State Of Madhya Pradesh
Appearing Advocates : For the Applicant: Narendra Nikhare, Advocate. For the Respondent: C.K. Mishra, G.A.
Date of Judgment : 07-10-2026
Head Note :-
M.P. Excise Act - Section 34(2) -

Comparative Citation:
2026 MPHC-JBP 80324,
Summary :-
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Section 483 of BNSS, 2023
- Section 34(2) of the M.P. Excise Act

2. Catch Words:
- Bail
- Illegal possession
- Liquor
- Judicial Magistrate First Class
- Bond
- Surety

3. Summary:
The applicant, in custody since 10.09.2026, sought bail under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for alleged illegal possession of 63 bulk litres of liquor under Section 34(2) of the M.P. Excise Act. The prosecution opposed bail citing the gravity of the offence and quantity seized. The court noted the offence is triable by a Judicial Magistrate First Class and the trial would be lengthy. Considering these factors and the applicant’s lack of antecedents, the court granted bail on a personal bond of Rs.50,000 with a surety, subject to several conditions. The order was to be communicated to the trial court for compliance.

4. Conclusion:
Petition Allowed
Judgment :-

1. This is the first application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, for grant of bail to the applicant who is in custody since 10.09.2026 in relation to FIR/Crime No.356/2026 registered at Police Station Obedullaganj, District Raisen (M.P.) for the offence under Section 34(2) of the M.P. Excise Act.

2. As per the prosecution case, the present applicant was allegedly found in illegal possession of 63 bulk litres of liquor.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant has been in custody since 10.09.2026. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The offence is triable by the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. In view of the aforesaid submissions, he prays to allow this bail application.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for grant of bail and submitted that, having regard to the nature and gravity of the offence, the quantity of liquor seized, the present bail application deserves to be dismissed.

5. Heard the rival contentions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the fact that the alleged offence is triable by the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, and that the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. Thus, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court/Committal Court.

7. This order shall remain operative subject to compliance of following conditions by the applicant:-

          "i) The applicant shall comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

          ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

          iii) The applicant shall not indulge himself in extending 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 the Police Officer, as the case may be;

          iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

          v) The applicant shall not seek unnecessary adjournments during trial;

          vi) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be; and

          vii) If any of the aforesaid conditions is violated, then this order shall lose its effect automatically."

8. Copy of this order be sent to the trial court concerned for information and compliance by the office of this Court.

Certified copy as per rules.
 
  CDJLawJournal