Manish Kumar Taneja Vs. State

Manish Kumar Taneja vs State

Disposition Case dismissed Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Nov 30, 2001

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/498680

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/498680
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Judge: N.S. Azad, J.
Decided On: Nov 30, 2001
Case Number: Misc. Criminal Case No. 5256/2001
Subject: Excise
Disposition: Case dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- - It is also the case of the non-applicant that in search, 109.64 litres of foreign liquor was found, which was seized in presence of Jiyauddin, theservant of this petitioner, as the petitioner made his escape good, on seeing the raid party. 6. The genuineness of papers produced on behalf of the petitioner, to p...

Key legal issue: Excise
Outcome / disposition: Case dismissed
Acts & sections: Madhya Pradesh Excise Act, 1915 - Sections 34(1), (2), 36-A and 59(2); Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 488

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Manish Kumar Taneja

Advocate S.C. Datt, Sr. Adv. and ;Vikas Sharma, Adv.

Respondent

State

Advocate A. Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer

Legal References

Acts: Madhya Pradesh Excise Act, 1915 - Sections 34(1), (2), 36-A and 59(2); Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 488
Cases Referred: Gurubakash Singh v. State of Punjab
Reported In: 2002(1)MPHT224

Excerpt

- - it is also the case of the non-applicant that in search, 109.64 litres of foreign liquor was found, which was seized in presence of jiyauddin, theservant of this petitioner, as the petitioner made his escape good, on seeing the raid party. 6. the genuineness of papers produced on behalf of the petitioner, to prove his alibi, can not be examined at this stage, where the court is required to confine its examination to the papers submitted on behalf of the state, except where the reliable documents, seeking no enquiry or verification, are submitted......it is also submitted by shri datt that on 14-7-2001, this petitioner came down to jabalpur in connection with marriage negotiations of his daughter and on his becoming sick, he remained admitted in trimurti nursing home as an indoor patient, till 18-7-2001. he has drawn the attention of the court to certificate issued by dr. prakash shrivastava, who has certified the fact of this petitioner been admitted in trimurti nursing home at 3.00 p.m. on 14-7-2001 and then his remaining as indoor patient till 2.00 p.m. on 18-7-2001.5. shri datt made this submission also that one sardar bedi was having enemical terms with this petitioner, who in fact, has managed this raid and got the false case prepared. shri datt has pointed out that for the purpose of saving persons from false allegations and harassment, this remedy under section 488, cr.pc is provided as explained in gurubakash singh v. state of punjab, reported in air 1980 sc 1630. it is also submitted by shri datt that this court asked the learned panel lawyer to make an enquiry and verify the aforesaid documents produced on behalf of this petitioner, which are found true on verification.6. the genuineness of papers produced on behalf of the petitioner, to prove his alibi, can not be examined at this stage, where the court is required to confine its examination to the papers submitted on behalf of the state, except where the reliable documents, seeking no enquiry or verification, are submitted. since the genuineness of the papers filed on behalf of petitioner is to be tested in trial, i am not inclined to rely upon the papers submitted on behalf of the petitioner.7. keeping in view the bar contained in sub-section (2) of section 59 of the m.p. excise act, the petitioner is not found entitled for bail and hence this petition is disallowed and rejected.8. misc. criminal case dismissed.

Full Judgment

ORDER

N.S. Azad. J.

1. Arguments heard.

2. CD. of Crime No. 208/2001, dated 15-7-2001, registered by Excise Sub-Inspector, Chhindwara, pertaining to offences punishable under Section 34 (1) (a) read with Sections 34 (2) and 36-A of the M.P. Excise Act, 1915, perused.

3. It is the case of the non-applicant that on 14th July, 2001, at 11.00 in the night, a raid was organised and carried out at Hotel Relax and Bar situated at Station Road, Chhindwara, where this petitioner was found sitting at the sale counter, who is the owner and had been running the Hotel so also Restaurant. It is also the case of the non-applicant that in search, 109.64 litres of foreign liquor was found, which was seized in presence of Jiyauddin, theservant of this petitioner, as the petitioner made his escape good, on seeing the raid party.

4. It is submitted by Shri Datt that long before raid was carried out, this petitioner leased out the Bar to one Ravi Baghel on 16-5-2001 under a deed of 'Chaloo Restaurant Babat Kirayanama', who was in possession of this Bar at the time of alleged raid. It is further submitted by Shri Datt that this Court has also perused the Notary register for verifying the genuineness of this document on 23-10-2001. It is also submitted by Shri Datt that on 14-7-2001, this petitioner came down to Jabalpur in connection with marriage negotiations of his daughter and on his becoming sick, he remained admitted in Trimurti Nursing Home as an indoor patient, till 18-7-2001. He has drawn the attention of the Court to certificate issued by Dr. Prakash Shrivastava, who has certified the fact of this petitioner been admitted in Trimurti Nursing Home at 3.00 p.m. on 14-7-2001 and then his remaining as indoor patient till 2.00 p.m. on 18-7-2001.

5. Shri Datt made this submission also that one Sardar Bedi was having enemical terms with this petitioner, who in fact, has managed this raid and got the false case prepared. Shri Datt has pointed out that for the purpose of saving persons from false allegations and harassment, this remedy under Section 488, Cr.PC is provided as explained in Gurubakash Singh v. State of Punjab, reported in AIR 1980 SC 1630. It is also submitted by Shri Datt that this Court asked the learned Panel Lawyer to make an enquiry and verify the aforesaid documents produced on behalf of this petitioner, which are found true on verification.

6. The genuineness of papers produced on behalf of the petitioner, to prove his alibi, can not be examined at this stage, where the Court is required to confine its examination to the papers submitted on behalf of the State, except where the reliable documents, seeking no enquiry or verification, are submitted. Since the genuineness of the papers filed on behalf of petitioner is to be tested in trial, I am not inclined to rely upon the papers submitted on behalf of the petitioner.

7. Keeping in view the bar contained in Sub-section (2) of Section 59 of the M.P. Excise Act, the petitioner is not found entitled for bail and hence this petition is disallowed and rejected.

8. Misc. Criminal Case dismissed.

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2001 Same Parties Manish Kumar Taneja vs State Same Subject Excise Same Judge N.S. Azad, J. Acts & Sections Madhya Pradesh Excise Act, 1915 - Sections 34(1), (2), 36-A a...

Excise