Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 625 (RAJ)

Guddi v. State of Rajasthan

2015-03-12

RAGHUVENDRA S.RATHORE

body2015
JUDGMENT : Heard learned counsel for the parties. After taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the nature of allegation against the petitioners, who are ladies, that they were alongwith the accused Angad and Dinesh and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the petitioners on bail. Consequently, this bail application is allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioners (1) Smt. Guddi W/o Late Hari Mukat and (2) Smt. Kalyani W/o Angad in F.I.R. No.62/2014, registered at Police Station Baharanvda Kalan, District Sawai Madhopur, shall be released on bail; provided each of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. Before parting with this order, it is to be noted that a very strange state of affairs is revealed in the instant case, where two persons have been murdered. Despite of the allegation against the accused Angad and Dinesh in the Parcha Bayan of the injured Laxman recorded on 26.07.2014, the investigating officer had neither arrested the said accused persons nor filed challan against them under Section 299 Cr.P.C. In the result, the two persons were left free even after filing of the first challan on 21.10.2014 whereas the other persons had been arrested. As against the accused Angad and Dinesh, the investigation was shown to be pending and challan was filed under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. Now on 05.03.2015, the accused Angad has been arrested. Admittedly no further investigation has been done, since the filing of the earlier challan on 21.10.2014 and the arrest of Angad on 05.03.2015, which was essential for the simple reason that the investigation against him was kept pending under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. Had the challan been filed against the accused Angad and Dinesh under Section 299 Cr.P.C. for which there were sufficient reason because from the evidence collected during investigation, by that time, the investigating officer had considered them to be accused further steps of declaring them absconder and to proceed for attachment of their property under Section 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. could have been taken. But no such steps for arrest of the accused could be taken as the investigation against them was still kept pending. When the investigating officer had filed challan under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. then in that situation, the arrest of even Angad could not have been made without there being further evidence collected in the investigation, during the intervening period from the date of earlier challan on 21.10.2014, upto the arrest of Angad on 05.03.2015. There is nothing on record and as a matter of fact, it is admitted before the Court that no further evidence was collected during the investigation, before arrest of Angad on 05.03.2015. A question, which arises in such a situation is whether the arrest of Angad on 05.03.2015 can be said to be in accordance to law when challan against him was filed under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. and no evidence is collected during further investigation. At the earlier stage the investigation was kept pending against him because by that time, as per the investigating officer, no evidence had come on record against him. It is often found that investigating officers, nowadays, exercise their powers by filing challan against the accused persons under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. despite of the fact that evidence against them is already on record. In garb of it, such investigating officers keep the accused persons free upto the time they feel like and later on arrest them, which includes principal offenders and file supplement challan from which it is revealed that no further evidence whatsoever is collected, during the intervening period when initially the investigation was kept pending under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. Such an extra legal procedure; which is now being adopted by the investigating officers, needs to be immediately stopped by the highest level of the department. In some cases such accused persons remain free, in the garb of investigation kept pending under Section 173 (8) Cr.P.C., for years together. Therefore, the ADG (Crime) is directed to look into the matter and appropriate steps be taken against the defaulter. In some cases such accused persons remain free, in the garb of investigation kept pending under Section 173 (8) Cr.P.C., for years together. Therefore, the ADG (Crime) is directed to look into the matter and appropriate steps be taken against the defaulter. Further, he is directed to ensure that proper instructions/ guidelines are issued to the investigating officers in the entire State that once evidence is collected during investigation and a person is found to be an accused has not been taken in custody then challan be filed against them under Section 299 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, appropriate steps be taken by declaring them absconder and then proceedings with regard to attachment of property under Section 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. If any investigating officer violates such instructions/ guidelines, he shall be liable for departmental proceedings. List this case on 30.03.2015. A copy of this order be sent to the ADG (Crime), Jaipur for doing the needful with intimation to this Court, through fax forthwith. Copies of the order be also sent to the Secretary, Department of Home, Government of Rajasthan and the Director General of Police, State of Rajasthan, throgh fax forthwith.