AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The applicant has filed this first bail application under section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.
Case diary is available.
The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.707/2019 registered at Police Station Ganj Basoda, District Vidisha in relation to the offences punishable under Section 34(2) of Excise Act.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence. He has been falsely implicated in the case. It is further submitted that Police has looted the house of the applicant which is apparent from the CCTV photographs produced by the applicant. It is further submitted that there is no explanation with regard to photograph submitted by the applicant. It is also submitted that incident, applicant submitted representations two times, copies of which are annexed with the present application. Hence, counsel for the applicant prays for grant of anticipatory bail.
Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the application and submits that the offence committed by the applicant is habitual offender and there are four criminal antecedents and in present case offence is registered under Section 34(2) of Excise Act. Therefore, prayed not to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. At the time of considering bail application, evidence cannot be analyzed and the fact that the applicant has committed the offence or not cannot be decided at this stage only on the basis of photographs submitted by the applicant.
Looking to the allegations levelled against the applicant and the facts and circumstances of the case, at this stage, it is not appropriate to grant the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant.
Consequently, this application stands rejected.
Let copy of this order be given to the learned Public Prosecutor with a direction to keep the same in the concerned case diary.