Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 2502 (RAJ)

Pushpa Bevi v. State of Rajasthan

2011-11-18

MAHESH BHAGWATI

body2011
JUDGMENT 1. - This order governs the disposal of IVth bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. by Mr. Sunil Tyagi, Advocate on behalf of applicant Pushpa Devi pertaining to FIR No. 249/2009 of Police Station Women, Kota City registered for the offences under Section 304B and 498A IPC. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the relevant material on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner Pushpa Bai canvassed that the petitioner has been in custody since August, 2009. The case has been pending trial and 11 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far. Learned counsel further canvassed that the mother, father and brother of the deceased Neelam have been examined by the prosecution and they have not supported the prosecution story and turned hostile. On the basis of statement of these witnesses, the Coordinate Bench admitted bail to the husband of the deceased Neelam. Thereafter other material witnesses namely PW 9 Smt. Mamta, PW-10 Jai Ram Das and PW-11 Rekha Bai have also been examined and they too have not supported the prosecution story. They all deposed in their statements that they were totally unaware of the people living in the in-laws house of deceased Neelam. Even the mother and father have deposed that when Neelam died she was living in their house. No material witness is now left, who is to be examined by the prosecution. The accused petitioner is not likely to be convicted on the basis of the statement of prosecution witnesses. Hence, the petitioner being a lady, must be granted indulgence of bail. Her detention in custody will now not serve any purpose. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor is not present in the Court. It is not known as to why the Public Prosecutors have not been appearing in the Court to attend the Government Cases. The fact of non appearance of Public Prosecutor in the Government cases should be brought to the notice of the Chief Secretary and Principal Secretary (Law). Albeit, the Chief Secretary and Principal Secretary (Law) have been directed to appear in person in another case, but this is a very serious issue, which must be dealt with by the Government immediately. The fact of non appearance of Public Prosecutor in the Government cases should be brought to the notice of the Chief Secretary and Principal Secretary (Law). Albeit, the Chief Secretary and Principal Secretary (Law) have been directed to appear in person in another case, but this is a very serious issue, which must be dealt with by the Government immediately. If the cases are dismissed in the absence of Government Counsel or the Public Prosecutor, it is not a matter of great significance, but it becomes serious when it tells upon the system built up over the years by the State. It is impressed upon that unless the Government counsels or Public Prosecutors, as the case may be, do justice with their job and function impartially and honestly, what assistance they shall be able to render to the Court and how the Court shall be in a position to impart justice? It is, undeniably and undisputably, a matter of great concern. It has been observed many a times that either the cases, wherein the Government is a party, are not attended seriously by the /Government Counsel/Public Prosecutor or if they appear, they do not render any assistance to the Courts. However, not attending the Government cases in Courts by the Government Counsels/PP has, now, become a phenomena. The Government should ponder over the matter seriously and should endeavour to find some some way, so that the cases, wherein the Government is a party, do not go unrepresented or do not fail on account of poor prosecution. 5. However, I sans expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, but keeping in view the hostile statements of the prosecution witnesses examined so far, do feel inclined to grant indulgence of bail to the petitioner and her bail application is allowed. 6. It is, therefore, ordered that the petitioner Pushpa Devi W/o Shri Banshi Lal shall be released on bail, provided she furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- ( Rs. Fifty Thousand) together with two sureties each of Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that she shall appear before the learned trial court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so till the trial is concluded. 7. 50,000/- ( Rs. Fifty Thousand) together with two sureties each of Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that she shall appear before the learned trial court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so till the trial is concluded. 7. A copy of this order be sent to the Chief Secretary to the Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur and Principal Secretary (Law), Jaipur for their information and taking necessary action in the matter.Bail Application allowed. *******