Joginder Singh vs State of Chhattisgarh

K.H.N. Kuranga, C.J.—Heard both the Counsel.

This petition u/s 438 of Cr.PC has been filed by applicant Joginder Singh for grant of anticipatory bail, apprehending arrest in Crime No. 125 of 2002 registered in Tumgaon Police Station for the offence punishable u/s 49A of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act (for short ''the Act'').

In the first instance learned Counsel appearing for the State-respondent submitted that this petition filed u/s 438 of Cr.PC by the applicant is not maintainable in view of Section 59A of the Act.

Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that there is no prima facie case made out by the prosecution for the commission of the offence u/s 49A of the Act and therefore the argument of the learned Counsel for the State-respondent that this petition filed u/s 438 of Cr.PC is not maintainable, cannot be accepted.

Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the case of the prosecution is that on 18-8-2002 when the house of Ramadhar the co-accused was searched, 30 litres of O.P. Liquor, two empty drums were seized and co-accused Ramadhar was arrested. He further submitted that the owner of the said house, from where the liquor was seized, was Sukhiya Bai - sister of Ramadhar and she has not been impleaded as an accused in this case. On the other hand, her statement was recorded which shows that the liquor belong to the applicant in this petition and he had kept the same in her house which is not disputed by the State Counsel. Learned Counsel submitted that the report of the Scientific Officer, Judicial Science Laboratory, Raipur, shows that the liquid contained in exhibits A and B which are harmful for human life were not present. It is further stated that if the liquid found in exhibits A and B is not harmful to human life if it is consumed after diluting to the specified quantity. It is also stated that Utpatti of the said liquor cannot be ascertained. The offence u/s 49A of the Act provides that if liquor, which is unfit for human consumption is exported, imported, transported or found in possession it is punishable. In view of the report of the experts it cannot be said that the liquor seized from the house of co-accused Ramadhar was harmful for human life. In the circumstances, it is difficult to say that the offence u/s 49A of the Act has been made out against the applicant. There is some substance in the arguments of the learned Counsel for the applicant. Counsel submitted that there is no other material to show that the applicant had kept the liquor in the house of Sukhiya Bai, who is the owner of the house. Just to explain her position she has come out with the explanation that the applicant had kept the same in her house.

Having regard to these facts, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. In the event of the arrest of applicant-Joginder Singh in the Crime No. 125/2002 by Tumgaon Police, they arc directed to release the applicant on bail on his executing a bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Police Officer arresting him. He shall co-operate with the investigating agency during the investigation.

In view of this order, the application, M.(Cr.).P. No. 4414/2002 stands disposed of.

Parties are entitled for certified copy of this order.