The High Court dismissed the bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. due to the serious nature of the offence and likelihood of absconding. The court directed the trial court to conclude the trial within six months.
Bail application dismissed; trial to be concluded within six months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
ORDER
S. B. Crimi nal ~i sc. Bai 1 ~ppl i cati on ~0.11579/2016 ~ajveer Singh Vs. State of ~ajasthan 9.9.2016
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA
Mr. B .M. ~urjar for the accused peti ti oner/s Mr. ish hi ~aj public Prosecutor for State.
This bail application has been filed by the
accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Brief facts of the case are that the complainant lodged an FIR No. 121/1993 registered at Police Station Jha1-awar for the offence under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC.
Counsel for the accused petitioner has
,
submitted that there is no role of the accused pe'titioner in the aforesaid crime and the police has falsely implicated him in the instant case. Counsel has submitted that some official of the police department made an interpolation in the mark-sheet with intention to oust the accused petitioner from the service and the accused petitioner was not having any knowledge that in this regard any FIR has been registered. Counsel has submitted that after a great lapse of 23 years, the police personnel of the Police Station Kotwali,
Jhalawar made search of the accused petitioner. Thereafter the accused petit'ioner after puttirlg his
42--
personal appearance before the Kotwali Jhalawar, surrendered himself. Counsel has further submitted that the accused petitioner is in judicial custody for the last twenty days and the offence alleged to have been committed by the accused petitioner is not punishable either with death sentence or life imprisonment. Hence the accused petitioner be released on bail.
Learned PP appearing for the State has opposed the bail application of the accused , petitioner and submitted that the offence committed by the accused petitioner is punishable for the offence und.er sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, which is serious in nature and the matter is pending before the learned Magistrate, Jhalawar since 1996. Learned PP has further submitted that the police filed challan on 5.2.1996 when the accused petitioner was absconding and the accused petitioner was arrested on 20.8.2016 in compliance of the standing warrant. Learned PP has further submitted that the accused petitioner is a police personal and if he is granted the benefit of bail, there will be full apprehension that he will not appear before the learned court below on the date/s fixed and temper with the prosecution witnesses. Hence the bail application of the accused petitioner be dismissed.
I have heard 1earns.d counsel for the accused
-3f
petitioner and learned PP appearing for the State.
From the facts of the case and looking to the allegations levelled against the accused petitioner and the submissions made by the learned PP, at this stage, it is not a fit case where the indulgence of bail can be granted to the accused petitioner.
The bail application filed by the accused petitioner under section 439 Cr.P.C. is accordingly dismissed. However, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of six months, if possible. If the trial court fails to conclude the trial within a period of six months from the date of receipt a certified copy of this order, the accused petitioner shall be at liberty to move bail application before the trial court.
(MAHmH CHANDRA SHARMA) J .
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the accused petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Whether the accused petitioner is fit for release on bail given the nature of the offence and delay in investigation.
Whether to direct the trial court to conclude the trial within a specific time period.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
AJVEER SINGH
STATE OF RAJASTHAN
MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
