High Court · 2025
Case Details
Acts & Sections
Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J. Heard Sri Devesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Yagvalkya Pandey, learned AGA as also Sri Mohd. Atif, learned counsel for the first informant, who has put in appearance in opposition to the bail application and perused the record. The instant bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2024 at the instance of the applicant Manoj has been filed seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 16 of 2025, under Section 310(2), 317(3) of BNS, 2023, Section 60(1) of Excise Act, and Section 4/25 of Arms Act, Police Station Atrauli, District Aligarh, during the pendency of the trial before the court below. The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Aligarh, vide order dated 05.03.2025 and the applicant is in jail since 12.02.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is entirely innocent and has been falsely implicated in this very case for ulterior motive. The applicant is not named in the FIR and his name has surfaced in the confessional statement of the co-accused persons. The FIR giving rise to the present Case Crime Number is stated to have been lodged on 05.01.2025 alleging that on 03.04.2025 some unknown persons broke the wall of a warehouse of Beer Shop and stole 90 boxes of Canned Beer "Kingfisher Strong" stored therein. The Police has shown recovery of the stolen Beer Cans from the applicant after 37 days of the alleged incident. It is also contended that initially the FIR was lodged under Section 305, 331(4) of BNS, 2023 but after 37 days of the alleged incident the Police arrested the applicant and challened him under Section 310(2), 317(3) of BNS, 2023 and 60(1) of Excise Act. It has been argued that there is no cogent evidence to implicate the applicant in the present case except the alleged recovery of which only the Police Personnel are the witnesses. It is also submitted that it does not sound to reason that the applicant would keep the stolen Beer Cans for such a long period for being recovered by the Police. The applicant is not a previous convict and has no criminal antecedents. The recovered three wheeler bearing Registration NO. UP 81 FT 4501 does not belong to the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant undertakes to cooperate with the investigation and shall not misuse the liberty granted if enlarged on bail. Hence the prayer for bail has been made. Per contra, the learned AGA as also the learned counsel for the first informant have opposed the bail plea. In the counter affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the first informant it has stated that the applicant along with 7 accomplices broke into the warehouse/godown of M/s Wave Distilleries and Breweries Ltd., District Aligarh by damaging the wall and asbestos sheet and stole 90 boxes of Kingfisher Strong Beer comprising of 160 cases Batch No. 1650 and 30 cases of Batch No. 1638 in a organized gang robbery involving excisable goods causing grave financial loss to the Distillery and resulting in penalty and excise duty imposition on the informant. The recovery of a substantial quantity of beer cans, cash generated from their illegal sale and the use of an E- Rickshaw bearing No. UP 81 FT 4501 directly connects the applicant to the commission of the offence. It is further submitted that the seized excisable article i.e. Beer Cans batch numbers had get not been released in the open market which clearly established that the recovered beer cans was stolen directly from the distillery. It is also submitted that the applicant does not have clear antecedents as claimed and involvement in Case Crime No. 295 of 2022 under Section 60(1) of the U.P. Excise Act, Police Station Atrauli, District Aligarh has been concealed. It is, accordingly, prayed that the bail application warrants outright dismissal. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the records placed before the Court, the Courts finds that charge-sheet against the applicant and co-accused persons namely Munindra, Rahul and Dheeraj have been filed on 08.03.2025 under Section 310(2)/317(3) of BNS and Section 60(1) of the Excise Act and against other co-accused persons i.e. Jai Prakash Lodhi, Jai Prakash alias Matt Singh, Rakesh alias Kalu and Mahipal under Section 310(2)/317(3) of BNS, Section 69(1) of the Excise Act and Section 4/25 of Arms Act. The charge sheet against all the accused persons have been filed as far back as on 08.03.2025, however, the statement of the prosecution witnesses has not been recorded so far. Further, the Court finds that Case Crime No. 295 of 2022 is not a case under Section 60(1) of the Excise Act rather is a case under Section 304-A and 279 of IPC lodged against unknown person as is evident from the true copy of the FIR dated 27.06.2022 annexed along with the rejoinder affidavit. The applicant is not involved in the same. Considering all those facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima-facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the accused-applicant, Jay Prakash Lodhi, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.
2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.
3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.
4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. Order Date :- 8.5.2025 PAWAN KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J. Heard Sri Devesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Yagvalkya Pandey, learned AGA as also Sri Mohd. Atif, learned counsel for the first informant, who has put in appearance in opposition to the bail application and perused the record. The instant bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2024 at the instance of the applicant Manoj has been filed seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 16 of 2025, under Section 310(2), 317(3) of BNS, 2023, Section 60(1) of Excise Act, and Section 4/25 of Arms Act, Police Station Atrauli, District Aligarh, during the pendency of the trial before the court below. The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Aligarh, vide order dated 05.03.2025 and the applicant is in jail since 12.02.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is entirely innocent and has been falsely implicated in this very case for ulterior motive. The applicant is not named in the FIR and his name has surfaced in the confessional statement of the co-accused persons. The FIR giving rise to the present Case Crime Number is stated to have been lodged on 05.01.2025 alleging that on 03.04.2025 some unknown persons broke the wall of a warehouse of Beer Shop and stole 90 boxes of Canned Beer "Kingfisher Strong" stored therein. The Police has shown recovery of the stolen Beer Cans from the applicant after 37 days of the alleged incident. It is also contended that initially the FIR was lodged under Section 305, 331(4) of BNS, 2023 but after 37 days of the alleged incident the Police arrested the applicant and challened him under Section 310(2), 317(3) of BNS, 2023 and 60(1) of Excise Act. It has been argued that there is no cogent evidence to implicate the applicant in the present case except the alleged recovery of which only the Police Personnel are the witnesses. It is also submitted that it does not sound to reason that the applicant would keep the stolen Beer Cans for such a long period for being recovered by the Police. The applicant is not a previous convict and has no criminal antecedents. The recovered three wheeler bearing Registration NO. UP 81 FT 4501 does not belong to the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant undertakes to cooperate with the investigation and shall not misuse the liberty granted if enlarged on bail. Hence the prayer for bail has been made. Per contra, the learned AGA as also the learned counsel for the first informant have opposed the bail plea. In the counter affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the first informant it has stated that the applicant along with 7 accomplices broke into the warehouse/godown of M/s Wave Distilleries and Breweries Ltd., District Aligarh by damaging the wall and asbestos sheet and stole 90 boxes of Kingfisher Strong Beer comprising of 160 cases Batch No. 1650 and 30 cases of Batch No. 1638 in a organized gang robbery involving excisable goods causing grave financial loss to the Distillery and resulting in penalty and excise duty imposition on the informant. The recovery of a substantial quantity of beer cans, cash generated from their illegal sale and the use of an E- Rickshaw bearing No. UP 81 FT 4501 directly connects the applicant to the commission of the offence. It is further submitted that the seized excisable article i.e. Beer Cans batch numbers had get not been released in the open market which clearly established that the recovered beer cans was stolen directly from the distillery. It is also submitted that the applicant does not have clear antecedents as claimed and involvement in Case Crime No. 295 of 2022 under Section 60(1) of the U.P. Excise Act, Police Station Atrauli, District Aligarh has been concealed. It is, accordingly, prayed that the bail application warrants outright dismissal. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the records placed before the Court, the Courts finds that charge-sheet against the applicant and co-accused persons namely Munindra, Rahul and Dheeraj have been filed on 08.03.2025 under Section 310(2)/317(3) of BNS and Section 60(1) of the Excise Act and against other co-accused persons i.e. Jai Prakash Lodhi, Jai Prakash alias Matt Singh, Rakesh alias Kalu and Mahipal under Section 310(2)/317(3) of BNS, Section 69(1) of the Excise Act and Section 4/25 of Arms Act. The charge sheet against all the accused persons have been filed as far back as on 08.03.2025, however, the statement of the prosecution witnesses has not been recorded so far. Further, the Court finds that Case Crime No. 295 of 2022 is not a case under Section 60(1) of the Excise Act rather is a case under Section 304-A and 279 of IPC lodged against unknown person as is evident from the true copy of the FIR dated 27.06.2022 annexed along with the rejoinder affidavit. The applicant is not involved in the same. Considering all those facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima-facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the accused-applicant, Jay Prakash Lodhi, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.
2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.
3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.
4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. Order Date :- 8.5.2025 PAWAN KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad