Allowed

Rajendra Singh S/O Shri Ashu Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC3 Jan 2020CRLMP/2017/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a petition to convert non-bailable warrants into bailable warrants under Section 70(2) Cr.P.C. Recognizing the accused's failure to appear and citing Supreme Court precedent, the court deemed it appropriate to allow them to appear through bailable warrants, though the order is conditional on their appearance on the forthcoming date.

What did the court decide?

The petitioners are directed to appear through bailable warrants before the trial court on the next date fixed (22.1.2020).

Rajendra Singh S/O Shri Ashu Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2017/2019

¶3

Rajendra Singh S/o Shri Ashu Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Near Mataji Mandir, Subhashpura, Ps Sadar, Bikaner.

¶4

Mahaveer Singh S/o Shri Rudra Singh B/c Rajpoot, Aged About 30 Years, R/o C-242, Singh Bhoomi, Khatipura, Jaipur.

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Chandra Shekhar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ramesh Choudhary

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

¶11

Judgment / Order

¶12

03/01/2020

¶13

The petitioners assail the order dated 12.3.2019 whereby application moved u/s 70(2) of Cr.P.C. for converting non bailable warrants into bailable warrants has been rejected.

¶14

Learned counsel submits that the accused petitioners were

¶15

unable to attend the court proceedings on 18.5.2018 and had moved an application for exemption of personal presence which was rejected and bail bonds were canceled whereafter the application was moved which was also rejected.

¶16

Learned counsel submits that the petitioners had been regularly appearing earlier also and therefore, application should be allowed and there is no occasion for not converting the warrants i.e. non bailable warrants into bailable warrants.

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[CRLMP-2017/2019]

¶19

Learned counsel relied on the judgment in the case of

¶20

“Inder Mohan Goswami & Anr. Vs. State of Uttranchal &

¶21

Ors. ” reported in 2007(12)SCC1.

¶22

I have considered the submissions.

¶23

From the perusal of aforesaid facts and taking them into consideration, this court observes that it was incumbent upon the petitioners to present themselves before the concerned Additional District Judge. However, in the interest of Justice and with the sole purpose to get the proceedings in the court culminate to its logical end, so also keeping in view the law laid down by the Supreme Court as above in “Inder Mohan Goswami( supra) it is deemed appropriate to direct the petitioners to appear through bailable warrants before the trial court on the next date fixed. It is made clear that if the accused petitioners do not appear on the date fixed i.e.on 22.1.2020, this order will not come in way of trial court in proceedings further in accordance with law.

¶24

7. The misc.petition is accordingly allowed.

¶25

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

¶26

Anu /43

Rajendra Singh S/O Shri Ashu Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Singh S/O Shri Ashu Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Manju Devi Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Nand Kishore Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Surendra Khare and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Prem Chand Vs State of Raj and Anr.

Kapil Bhargava S/O Shri Heera Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Pooja Meena D/O Ramesh Chand Meena B/C Meena Vs State of Rajasthan