Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 2203 (RAJ)

Vaman Narayan Ghiya v. The State of Rajasthan

2009-10-23

GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS

body2009
JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Public Prosecutor for the State and carefully gone through the impugned, order. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that though petitioner is facing trial at various places for offences under Sections 411, 413 and 379 IPC and in one case he has been convicted under Section 413 IPC for life imprisonment and is undergoing the said sentence. It is also submitted that in this matter petitioner is behind the bars since 14th August, 2003 and near about six years have passed, therefore, at least now he may be enlarged on bail because still 12 witnesses are yet to be examined by the trial court and last witness was examined on 02nd March, 2006 and thereafter no statement of any witness is recorded by the trial court. 3. Further, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that there are various judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in which it has been held that if accused is behind the bars for more than five years and facing trial, then he may be enlarged on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has invited attention of this Court towards the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2001 (1) SCC 247 , (State, CBI/SPE, New Delhi v. Pal Singh & Anr.) and JT 2006 (11) SC 33, (Baban Rao Tukaram Ranjane v. State of Maharashtra) . 5. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently argued that petitioner is habitual offender and is facing trial in as many as 11 cases and in two cases he has been convicted, out of which, in one case he has been convicted for life imprisonment and is behind the bars. 6. Meaning thereby petitioner is behind the bars from last more than six years and trial is still pending. 7. In the interest of justice, while following the adjudication made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion, I think it just and proper to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that the applicant namely Vaman Narayan Ghiya S/O late Shri Badari Narain Ghiya shall be released on bail (in FIR No. 41/1998 P.S. Rawatbhata, District Chittorgarh) provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 8. Accordingly, the application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that the applicant namely Vaman Narayan Ghiya S/O late Shri Badari Narain Ghiya shall be released on bail (in FIR No. 41/1998 P.S. Rawatbhata, District Chittorgarh) provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- and furnishes two sound and solvent sureties in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court for his appearance before that Court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so, till the completion of trial. It is made clear that if on s equent dates of hearing, if applicant will not attend the Court and se exemption from attendance and will not cooperate in trial, then the S e will be at liberty to file application for cancellation of his bail.Bail Application Allowed. *******