Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 1548 (RAJ)

Union of India v. Yogendra Singh Rajput

2021-08-18

MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL

body2021
ORDER 1. These applications under Section 439(2) seeking cancellation of bail granted to the accused-respondents under Section 439 CrPC by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge No.06, Jaipur Metropolitan-II, vide order dated 07.12.2020 & 11.12.2020 respectively, have been filed by the applicant. 2. Sole contention raised by the learned counsel for the applicant is that the first bail application of the accused-petitioners was dismissed by the learned Court vide its order dated 01.12.2020; but, they were extended benefit of bail while entertaining their second bail applications just six days and ten days respectively thereafter vide order dated 07.12.2020 & 11.12.2020 respectively. He submitted that in the interregnum there was no change in circumstance except lapse of few days. He, therefore, prayed for cancellation of bail extended to accused-petitioners vide order dated 07.12.2020 & 11.12.2020 respectively. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the accused-respondent submitted that the contention is wholly misconceived inasmuch as vide order dated 01.12.2020, the bail application of the accused-respondents was dismissed by the learned trial Court under Section 437 CrPC; whereas, they have been extended benefit of bail by the learned Sessions Court under Section 439 CrPC and hence, it is not a case of entertaining second bail applications by the same Court within a period of few days without there being substantial change in circumstance. They, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the application seeking cancellation of bail. 4. Heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record. 5. In view of the fact that after dismissal of their bail application by the learned trial Court under Section 437 CrPC, they have been extended benefit of bail by the learned Sessions Court under Section 439 CrPC, the contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioner looses its force. Further, a perusal of the orders dated 07.12.2020 & 11.12.2020 reveal that the same are well-reasoned based on relevant criteria. 6. Therefore, the bail cancellation applications are dismissed.