Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Mahadev Singh vs State Of Rajasthan Through Pp on 27 September, 2016
Author: Mohammad Rafiq
Bench: Mohammad Rafiq
1
S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 3574/2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR.
ORDER
S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 3574/2016
WITH
S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. STAY APPLICATION NO. 3701/2016
Mahadev Singh son of Shri Sobran Singh, by caste Gurjar,
resident of Village Bichola, Police Station Mania, District
Dholpur (Raj.)
Accused-Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan through P.P.
Respondent.
DATE OF ORDER : 27.09.2016
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
Mr. Anil Jain, for the petitioner.
Mr. N.S. Dhakad, Public Prosecutor, for respondent.
BY THE COURT:
This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer that time fixed in he judgment dated 12.04.2014 passed by the Court of Sessions, Dholpur(for short 'the appellate court') while partly allowing the appeal of the petitioner requiring him to deposit a sum of Rs. 7,000/- as expenses of prosecution and submit bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with the undertaking that he shall maintain good 2 S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 3574/2016 conduct and shall not repeat the similar offence for a period of one year and that he shall appear before the Court as and when called up to serve out the sentence. Aforesaid benefit was granted to the petitioner while invoking Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner used to stay at Ahmedabad to earn his livelihood. The petitioner was not aware of the aforesaid order till he returned to his native from Ahmedabad in third week of December, 2015. He immediately filed an application before the appellate court on 12.01.2016, but that application has been dismissed by the appellate court vide impugned order dated 22.06.2016.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is labourer and willing to abide by the aforesaid directions of the appellate court and this Court may now permit him to furnish bail bond with the required undertaking and also amount of prosecution expenses.
Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition and submitted that the application for extension of time itself was made after more than 1½ years after passing of judgment dated 12.04.2014 whereas bail bond and undertaking was 3 S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 3574/2016 required to be filed for maintaining good conduct for a period of one year.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is inclined to extend the time by fortnight for furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- by the petitioner along with required undertaking before the trial court that he shall maintain good conduct and shall not repeat the similar offence and that he shall appear before the Court as and when called upon to serve out the sentence, but at the same time, amount of expenses of prosecution is required to be increased marginally to a sum of Rs. 10,000/-, which the petitioner shall deposit with the trial court.
The petition is allowed with the aforesaid directions.
Stay application stands disposed off.
(MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J.
Manoj, S.NO.53.