Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1066 (RAJ)

Gauri Shankar v. State of Rajasthan

2016-07-25

PRASHANT KUMAR AGARWAL

body2016
ORDER : Prashant Kumar Agarwal, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The accused-petitioner has filed this criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 30.6.2016 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Cases) No.1, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur in Sessions Case No. 35/2010 whereby the learned trial Court has dismissed the application under Section 70 (2) Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner. 3. Brief relevant facts for the disposal of this petition are that FIR No. 694/2009 for the offence under Section 376 read with Section 493 IPC was registered against the petitioner at Police Station, Jawahar Circle, Jaipur City (East) on 7.11.2009 and benefit of anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner by the High Court on 8.1.2010 in SB Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 77/2010. After investigation charge-sheet was filed against the petitioner and he appeared before the learned trial Court. It appears that during trial the parties entered into compromise and, therefore, the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was filed by them before this Court in the form of SB Criminal Misc. Petition No.2270/2010 and vide order dated 15.3.2011 the petition was allowed and the proceedings pending before the trial Court were quashed. Thereafter, the prosecutrix filed SB Criminal Misc. Application No. 114/2014 before this Court with a prayer that the order dated 15.3.2011 may be recalled as the petitioner has not fulfilled and complied with the terms and conditions of the compromise. The aforesaid application was allowed by this Court vide order dated 14.7.2015 and the order dated 15.3.2011 was recalled and the trial Court was directed to re-register the Criminal Case No. 35/2010 against the petitioner and to proceed further in accordance with law. In compliance of the order dated 14.7.2015 the trial Court issued a warrant of arrest against the petitioner to ensure his presence before it. In these circumstances, the petitioner filed application under Section 70(2) Cr.P.C. with a prayer to convert the warrant of arrest into bailable warrant and the same was dismissed vide impugned order. 4. In compliance of the order dated 14.7.2015 the trial Court issued a warrant of arrest against the petitioner to ensure his presence before it. In these circumstances, the petitioner filed application under Section 70(2) Cr.P.C. with a prayer to convert the warrant of arrest into bailable warrant and the same was dismissed vide impugned order. 4. On consideration of submissions made on behalf of the respective parties and the material made available on record and more particularly in view of the fact that benefit of anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner by the High Court vide order dated 8.1.2010 and the petitioner was facing trial after charge-sheet was filed against him, it is appropriate to issue direction to the trial Court to take fresh bail bonds from the petitioner when he appears before it. 5. Consequently, the revision petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 30.6.2016 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Cases) No.1, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur in Sessions Case No. 35/2010 is set aside and the petitioner is directed to appear before the trial Court on or before 3.8.2016 and the trial Court is directed to release him on bail after taking fresh bail bonds from him. Till 3.8.2016, the petitioner shall not be arrested in execution of warrant of arrest issued by the trial Court. It is made clear that if the petitioner fails to appear on or before 3.8.2016 this order shall stand automatically cancelled and in that eventuality the process issued against the petitioner will take its own course.