Akhil Upadhyay vs. State Of Chhattisgarh

Held

The Court allowed the application for anticipatory bail. The reasoning was based on the fact that the applicant is the owner of the brick kiln and has produced a GST bill for the seized coal. The Court found this sufficient to extend the benefit of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. The operative direction was that the applicant would be released on bail upon executing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- to the satisfaction of the arresting officer, subject to conditions including availability for interrogation, not inducing witnesses, and not acting prejudicially to a fair trial. No issues were expressly left undecided.

Facts

The applicant, Akhil Upadhyay, sought anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 3/2022 registered at Police Station Jaynagar, District Surajpur, for offences under Section 379 of the IPC and Section 41(4) of the Cr.P.C. The prosecution's case is that on June 25, 2022, police seized three tonnes of coal valued at approximately Rs. 30,000/- from Madhav Bricks Factory. The applicant, owner of the brick kiln, claimed the coal was purchased through a bill where GST was paid, but could not produce the original bills at the time of seizure. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, considering the allegations of theft of coal and the applicant's claim of lawful purchase with GST payment. Contentions of the Applicant: The applicant argued that he is the owner of a brick kiln and the seized coal was purchased through a valid bill, for which GST was paid. He contended that his inability to produce the original bills at the time of seizure was a temporary issue and that the purchase was legitimate. Contentions of the State: The State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.