Single judge High Court allowed criminal revision petition quashing non-bailable warrant. Court exercised power to direct issuance of bailable warrant following Supreme Court precedents regarding discretion under Section 319 CrPC.
Quashed the non-bailable warrant and directed issuance of a bailable warrant against the petitioner.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 612/2021
Chhotu Lal Gurjar Son Of Shri Ramcharan, Resident Of Jhopadiya Saand At Present R/o Nayagaon, Police Station Budhadeet, District Kota (Raj)
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur, For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bhawani Shankar Sharma, PP
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA
Order
18/10/2022
;kph&vfHk;qDr dh vksj ls ;g iqujh{k.k ;kfpdk v/khuLFk fopkj.k U;k;ky;] vfrfjDr ls'ku U;k;ky;] efgyk mRihM+u] izdj.k la[;k&1] dksVk }kjk ls'ku izdj.k la[;k&88@2018 esa ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 16-03-2021 ls O;fFkr gksdj is'k dh xbZ gS] ftlds }kjk fof'k"V yksd vfHk;kstd dh vksj ls izLrqr izkFkZuk i= varxZr /kkjk 319 n.M izfdz;k lafgrk Lohdkj djrs gq, ;kph&vfHk;qDr ds fo:) /kkjk 341 o 302@34 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk ds vUrxZr fopkj.k fd;s tkus ,oa fxjQ~rkjh okj.V ls ryc fd;s tkus dk vkns'k fn;k x;k gSA
iqujh{k.k ;kfpdk dh i`"BHkwfe ls lacaf/kr rF; la{ksi esa bl izdkj gSa fd ifjoknh }kjdhyky eh.kk us fnukad 08-06-2018 dks bl vk'k; dh fjiksVZ ntZ djokbZ fd fnukad 06-06-2018 dh jkf= esa mldk HkkbZ iujkt vius lkfFk;ksa ftrsUnz] NksVwyky eh.kk ,oa NksVwyky xqtZj ds lkFk 'kjkc ikVhZ dj jgk FkkA bl nkSjku muds vkil esa cgl gks xbZA ftrsUnz eh.kk us mlds HkkbZ dks idM+ fy;k vkSj NksVwyky eh.kk us iujkt ds flj esa dqYgkM+h dh ekj nhA ekSds ij iujkt dh iRuh ,oa iq=h ds vkus ij vfHk;qDrx.k Hkkx x;sA bl fjiksVZ ij eqdnek ntZ fd;k tkdj
(2 of 4)
[CRLR-612/2021]
ckn vuqla/kku vfHk;qDrx.k ftrsUnz ,oa NksVwyky eh.kk iq= dsnkjyky ds fo:) /kkjk 341]325]302]201@34 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk esa vkjksi i= izLrqr fd;k x;kA
iqujh{k.k ;kfpdk ij nksuksa i{kksa dh cgl lquh ,oa i=koyh dk voyksdu fd;k x;kA ;kph&vfHk;qDr ds fo}ku vf/koDrk dk rdZ jgk fd gkykWafd lEiw.kZ vkyksP; vkns'k dks bl iqujh{k.k ;kfpdk ds tfj;s pqukSrh vo'; nh xbZ gS] ysfdu cgl ds nkSjku mudk ;g dFku jgk fd v/khuLFk U;k;ky; }kjk /kkjk 319 n.M izfdz;k lafgrk dk izkFkZuk i= Lohdkj djus ,oa ;kph&vfHk;qDr ds fo:) /kkjk 341 rFkk 302@34 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk esa fopkj.k fd;s tkus ds vkns'k dks xq.kkoxq.k ij dksbZ pqukSrh ugha nsrs gSa vkSj mudh ;g lhfer izkFkZuk gS fd ;kph&vfHk;qDr dh rych fxjQrkjh okj.V ds LFkku ij tekurh okj.V ls fd;s tkus rd vkyksP; vkns'k esa la'kks/ku fd;k tk,A bl dze esa mudk rdZ jgk fd izlaKku ysus ds ckn v/khuLFk U;k;ky; us lh/ks gh ;kph&vfHkq;Dr dks fxjQrkjh okj.V ls ryc fd;k gS] tcfd ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us fuEufyf[kr U;kf;d fofu'p;ksa esa ;g Li"Vr% fu.khZr fd;k gS fd vfHk;qDr dh rych ds dze esa igys lEeu vkSj mlds i'pkr tekurh okj.V ls mifLFkfr lqfuf'pr djuh pkfg,] lh/kk fxjQ~rkjh okj.V tkjh ugha djuk pkfg,] tc rd fd dksbZ vkiokfnd ifjfLFkfr u gksA mUgksaus vius leFkZu esa fuEu U;kf;d fofu'p;ksa dk voyEc fy;kA
Cri. Appeal No. 1392/2007
Inder Mohan Goswami & Anr. Vs. State of Uttaranchal & Ors. Date of Judgment 09-10-2007
fo}ku yksd vfHk;kstd us bldk fojks/k fd;kA
mHk;i{k ds rdZ fordZ ij euu fd;kA i=koyh ,oa izLrqr U;kf;d fofu'p;ksa dk /;kuiwoZd v/;;u fd;k x;kA pwafd cgl ds nkSjku ;kph&vfHk;qDr ds fo}ku vf/koDrk us v/khuLFk U;k;ky; }kjk /kkjk 319 n.M izfdz;k lafgrk ds izkFkZuk i= dks Lohdkj djus ,oa ;kph&vfHk;qDr ds fo:) /kkjk 341 o 302@34 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk ds vUrxZr fopkj.k fd;s tkus ds dze esa vkyksP; vkns'k dks xq.kkoxq.k ij dksbZ pqukSrh ugha nh gS] vr% vkyksP; vkns'k ds xq.kkoxq.k ij foospu djus dh vko';drk ugha gSA
tgkWa rd ;kph&vfHk;qDr dh rych dk iz'u gS] v/khuLFk fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk ;kph&vfHk;qDr ds fo:) izlaKku fy;k tkdj lh/ks gh fxjQ~rkjh
(3 of 4) [CRLR-612/2021]
okj.V ls ryc fd;k x;k gSA mDr U;kf;d fofu'p;ksa esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us ;g fu.khZr fd;k gS fd tc rd vfHk;qDr ij t?kU; vijk/k dk vkjksi u gks vkSj lkFk gh ;g vk'kadk u gks fd og lk{; dks u"V dj nsxk vFkok mlls NsM+NkM+ djsxk ;k fof/kd izfdz;k ls cpus dh lEHkkouk u gks rks ml fLFkfr esa izdj.k esa vfHk;qDr dh rych ds dze esa fxjQ~rkjh okj.V tkjh ugha djuk pkfg,A
bu fofu'p;ksa esa ;g Hkh fu.khZr fd;k x;k gS fd igys gh volj ij xSjtekurh okj.V ¼fxjQrkjh okj.V½ ls vfHk;qDr dks ryc ugha fd;k tkuk pkfg,] oju igys volj ij lEeu vFkok tekurh okj.V ls ryc fd;k tkuk pkfg,] tc rd fd ,slh ifjfLFkfr;kWa u gks fd vfHk;qDr dks rqjUr vfHkj{kk esa ugha fy;k x;k rks og vU; O;fDr dks uqdlku igqapk nsxk ;k iqfyl ds fy;s ,sls vfHk;qDr dks <wa<uk lEHko ugha gksxkA
blh izdkj ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us U;kf;d fofu'p; Vikas Vs. State of Rajasthan esa ;g Hkh fu.khZr fd;k gS fd Another such instance of judicial discretion is the issue of non-bailable warrant in a complaint case under an application of Section 319 CrPC. The power under Section 319 CrPC being discretionary must be exercised judiciously with extreme care and caution. The court should properly balance both personal liberty and societal interest before issuing warrants. There cannot be any straitjacket formula for issuance of warrants but as a general rule, unless an accused is likely to tamper or destroy the evidence or is likely to evade the process of law, issuance of nonbailable warrants should be avoided.
mDr U;kf;d fofu'p;ksa ds izdk'k esa ;g Li"V gS fd U;k;ky; dks /kkjk 319 n.M izfdz;k lafgrk ds vUrxZr fdlh O;fDr dks vfHk;qDr ds :i esa la;ksftr djus ij mldh rych lh/ks gh fxjQrkjh okj.V ls ugha djuh pkfg,A dsoy mi;qZDr of.kZr ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa gh fxjQrkjh okj.V ls ryc fd;k tk ldrk gS] vU;Fkk tekurh okj.V ;k lEeu ls ryc fd;k tkuk pkfg,A
mYys[kuh; gS fd orZeku ekeys esa ?kVuk o"kZ 2018 dh crkbZ xbZ gS vkSj pkj o"kZ i'pkr vfHk;qDr dks ryc fd;k x;k gS] vr% vfHk;qDr }kjk vfHk;kstu dh lk{; dks u"V fd;s tkus ;k NsM+NkM+ dh dksbZ vk'kadk ugha gS ,oa mDr U;kf;d fofu'p;ksa esa fu.khZr fdlh izdkj dh dksbZ izfrdwy ifjfLFkfr;kWa Hkh orZeku ekeys esa nf'kZr ugha gSA bu leLr rF;ksa dks /;ku esa j[krs gq, ;kph&vfHk;qDr dks igys volj ij gh fxjQ~rkjh okj.V ds LFkku ij tekurh okj.V ls ryc fd;s dh gn rd vkyksP; vkns'k esa ifjorZu fd;k tkuk mfpr izrhr gksrk gSA
(4 of 4) [CRLR-612/2021]
ifj.kker% ;kph&vfHk;qDr dh vksj ls izLrqr ;g iqujh{k.k ;kfpdk vkaf'kd :i ls Lohdkj dh tkrh gSA ;kph&vfHk;qDr ds fo:) /kkjk 341 o 302@34 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk ds vUrxZr fopkj.k fd;s tkus ds dze esa v/khuLFk fopkj.k U;k;ky; dk vkyksP; vkns'k ;Fkkor j[kk tkrk gS] ysfdu ;kph&vfHk;qDr dh rych ds dze esa vkyksP; vkns'k dks ifjofrZr@la'kksf/kr fd;k tkdj ;kph&vfHk;qDr dks igys volj ij fxjQ~rkjh okj.V ds LFkku ij tekurh okj.V ls ryc fd;s tkus dk vkns'k fn;k tkrk gSA
(SHUBHA MEHTA),J
Pradeep Thawani/61
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should exercise discretion to quash the non-bailable warrant and issue a bailable warrant.
Whether the petitioner has shown reason to believe there is an apprehension of personal liberty threat or tampering of evidence.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Inder Mohan Goswami & Anr. Vs. State of Uttaranchal & OrsReferred¶20
Cri. Appeal No. 1392/2007
Vikas Vs. State of RajasthanReferred¶30
(2014) 3 SCC 321 Vikas Vs. State of Rajasthan · Who else cites this
Chhotu Lal Gurjar
State Of Rajasthan
Dwarika Lal Meena
Shubha Mehta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
