High CourtsSingle Bench(2019) 01 UK CK 0005

Bhupal Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 2 January 2019

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manoj K. Tiwari, J
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 2000 Of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 354 words

Manoj K. Tiwari, J

1.

According to the applicant, he is a licencee in respect of 'Country Made Liquor'. While transporting country made liquor in vehicle No. UA04D/2971, 150 cartons of country made liquor were seized by the police. Applicant moved an application for release of the seized liquor, which was rejected by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Almora. Applicant thereafter filed a Criminal Revision No. 19 of 2018 before learned Sessions Judge, Almora.

2.

The said revision petition filed by the petitioner was allowed by learned Sessions Judge, Almora vide judgment and order dated 03.11.2018 and he ordered for release of the liquor in favour of the applicant, subject to fulfillment of certain conditions. Applicant is aggrieved by condition No. 5, which provides that he will have to deposit a sum equivalent to the price of the 150 cartons of liquor, as security for its release. Thus, feeling aggrieved, applicant has approached this Court.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the aforesaid condition imposed by learned revisional court is too harsh and applicant cannot fulfill the said condition with the limited resources at his command. He further submits that the quality of country made liquor deteriorates with the passage of time and it becomes unfit for human consumption after a certain period. He further submits that applicant is ready and willing to furnish adequate security, therefore, the condition of deposit of price of the liquor deserves to be set aside. He further submits that if applicant is made to deposit the value of seized liquor, then the applicant will be left with no working capital and his business would come to a grinding halt.

4.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this C-482 application is disposed of by modifying condition No. 5, mentioned in para 8 of the impugned order dated 03.11.2018, by providing that if the applicant deposits 20 per cent of the price of liquor in cash and furnishes surety/bank guarantee for the remaining amount then the seized liquor may be released in his favour.