logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2025 MPHC 232 print Preview print Next print
Court : High Court of Madhya Pradesh (Bench at Indore)
Case No : MISC. Criminal Case No. 56518 of 2025
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV S. KALGAONKAR
Parties : Rai Singh Versus The State Of Madhya Pradesh
Appearing Advocates : For the Applicant: Usha Chouhan, Rudra Tiwari, Advocates. For the Respondent: Romil Verma, Govt. Advocate.
Date of Judgment : 09-12-2025
Head Note :-
MP Excise Act - Section 34(2) -

Comparative Citation:
2025 MPHC-IND 36107,
Summary :-
Mistral API responded but no summary was generated.
Judgment :-

1. This second application has been filed by applicant under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No.236 of 2025 registered at Police Station- Machalpur, District- Rajgarh (M.P.) for offence punishable under Section 34(2) of MP Excise Act. He is in judicial custody since 09.08.2025. His first application has been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 13.10.2025, passed in M.Cr.C. No.41212/2025 with liberty to renew the prayer after examination of the seizure witness before the trial Court. Thereafter, seizure witnesses Bhupendra Singh(PW1) and Laxman(PW2) have been examined before the trial Court.

2. Heard the arguments.

3. Perused the grounds for grant of bail stated in the application, case diary and the relevant material on record.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant, in addition to the grounds mentioned in the application, submits that the applicant is falsely implicated in the alleged offence merely on suspicion. The illegal liquor was not seized from active and conscious possession of the applicant. He has not committed the alleged offence. The seizure witnesses Bhupendra Singh(PW1) and Laxman(PW2) have been examined before the trial Court. They did not support the prosecution. No criminal antecedent is reported against the applicant. There is no likelihood of tampering with evidence by the applicant. Jail incarceration is causing hardship to the applicant and his dependent family. Co-accused Beeram Singh has been extended benefit of bail vide order dated 03.09.2025, passed in M.Cr.C. No.38981/2025. Co-accused Bunty @ Ravindra has been extended benefit of bail vide order dated 10.09.2025, passed in M.Cr.C. No.40023/2025. Co-accused Chandu @ Chandrapal has been extended benefit of bail vide order dated 26.09.2025, passed in M.Cr.C. No.43814/2025. Applicant is ready to cooperate in the further trial.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the application on the ground of gravity of alleged offence. However, after going through the case diary, he fairly states that no criminal antecedent is reported against the applicant.

6. According to the material available on case diary, S.I Guddu Kushwaha of P.S. Machalpur intercepted a pickup vehicle bearing registration No. MP-39C-3229 on 9.8.2025 at Bus Stand Machalpur to verify secret information. Ishwar and Rai Singh(applicant) were found transporting country made liquor and beer total quantity 790 bulk liters without any valid permit. The vehicle and illicit liquor was seized from the joint possession of Ishwar and applicant - Rai Singh. Ishwar and Rai Singh informed that Beeram Singh has provided them illicit liquor. The P.S. Machalpur registered FIR for offence punishable under Section 34(2) of MP Excise Act against Ishwar, Raisingh and Beeram Singh. The applicant was arrested on 09.8.2025. He is in custody ever since.The investigation is almost over. The veracity of prosecution and involvement of applicant in the alleged offence will be determined after evidence in the trial.

7. As informed, the applicant is aged 35 years. He is an agriculturist by profession and has the responsibility of dependent family. Considering these aspects, there appears to be no possibility of fleeing from justice. In absence of any criminal antecedent, considering the socio-economic status of the applicant, there appears to be no likelihood of tampering with evidence or influencing the witnesses by the applicant. There appears to be no compelling reason to continue incarceration of the applicant. However, the observations, herein-above, are recorded for present application only.

8. Considering the rival contentions and overall circumstances of the case, in the light of aforestated facts, but without commenting on the merits, this Court is inclined to release the applicant on bail. Thus, the application is allowed.

9. Accordingly, it is directed that applicant - Rai Singh shall be released on bail in connection with Crime, as mentioned in first paragraph of this order, upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the same amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, for compliance with the following conditions : (For convenience of understanding by accused and surety, the conditions of bail are also reproduced in Hindi asunder):-



10. This order shall be effective till the end of trial. However, in case of breach of any of the preconditions of bail, the Trial Court may consider, on merit, cancellation of bail without any impediment from this order.

11. The trial Court shall get these conditions reproduced on the personal bond by the accused and on surety bond by the surety concerned. If any of them is unable to write, the scribe shall certify that he had explained the conditions to the concerned accused or the surety.

C.C. as per rules.
 
  CDJLawJournal