Sunil vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2567 MP

                                                                   1                           MCRC-28235-2021
                                         The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                   MCRC-28235-2021
                                                      (SUNIL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)


                                 Jabalpur, Dated : 21-06-2021
                                       Heard through Video Conferencing.

                                       Shri M.R. Verma, learned counsel for the applicant.
                                       Shri Puneet Shroti, learned PL for the respondent/State.

Heard with the aid of case diary.

This is the second bail application filed under section 439 Cr.P.C.

Applicant Sunil was arrested on 12.11.2020 in Crime No.47/2020 registered at Police Station Amarwada, District Chhindwara for the offence punishable under Section 34 (2) of M.P. Excise Act.

Earlier bail application of the applicant was dismissed on merit by this Court vide order dated 01.04.2021 passed in M.Cr.C. No.4941/2021.

As per prosecution case, on 17.01.2020, at around 11 AM, Mahendra Bhagat, Sub-Inspector, Police Chowki Sigodi, Police Station Amarwada received an information on mobile that one truck (container) slipped in a drain from the road near Sigodi Bypass, Patel Dhaba. On that, Mahendra Bhagat,

Sub-Inspector along with other members of the police force reached the spot where he found that the truck bearing registration number HR-55-N-6841 had slipped into a drain and applicant Sunil and co-accused Satish Tiwari, driver and conductor of said truck respectively were lying there in an injured condition. He sent them to the hospital for treatment but they fled away from the hospital without informing the police. Upon searching the truck, he found that 1152 bulk liters of English liquor was loaded in the truck and was being transported illegally by the applicant Sunil and co-accused Satish Tiwari. He seized the truck and liquor and registered Crime No.47/2020 for the offence punishable under Section 34 (2) of M.P. Excise Act at Police Station Amarwada and investigated the matter. During investigation, it was found that the said liquor belonged to co-accused Aashu. So he arrested him on Signature Not Verified SAN 30.11.2020 and also arrested applicant Sunil on 12.11.2020. It was also found Digitally signed by MANOJ NAIR Date: 2021.06.22 16:37:26 IST 2 MCRC-28235-2021 that the seized truck was registered in the name of co-accused Deepak S/o Jagveer Singh, District Rohtak, Haryana. So he made him too an accused in the crime.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the offence. The applicant was only the

driver of the said truck and he acted on the instructions of his employer. Applicant has been in custody since 12.11.2020. Charge sheet has been filed and the conclusion of trial will take time, hence prayed for release of the applicant on bail.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted that 1152 bulk liters of English liquor was being transported by the applicant and co-accused Satish Tiwari. So, looking to the provisions of Section 59-A of the MP Excise Act, the applicant should not be released on bail.

Earlier bail application of the applicant was dismissed on merit by this Court vide order dated 01.04.2021 passed in M.Cr.C. No.4941/2021 and thereafter there has been no change in circumstances, except the custody period. Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajesh Ranjan Yadav alias Pappu Yadav v. CBI Through its Director reported in (2007) 1 SCC 70 held that bail, can not be granted solely on the ground of long incarnation in jail and inability of accused to conduct the defence. Apex Court in the case of State of M.P. v. Kajad, (2001) 7 SCC 673 observed "It is true that successive bail applications are permissible under the changed circumstances. But without the change in the circumstances, the second application would be deemed to be seeking review of the earlier judgment which is not permissible under criminal law as has been held by this Court in Hari Singh Mann v. Harbhajan Singh Bajwa [(2001) 1 SCC 169 : 2001 SCC (Cri) 113] and various other judgments."

It is alleged that applicant and co-accused Satish Tiwari were illegally transporting 1152 bulk liters of English liquor which was seized by the police.

Signature Not Verified SAN So looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the provisions of

Digitally signed by MANOJ NAIR Date: 2021.06.22 16:37:26 IST 3 MCRC-28235-2021 Section 59-A of M.P. Excise Act, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

Hence, the application is dismissed.

(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE

mn

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by MANOJ NAIR Date: 2021.06.22 16:37:26 IST