Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Babu Lal Meena vs State Of Rajasthan on 12 September, 2014
Bench: T.S. Thakur, R. Banumathi
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.(S). 1995 OF 2014
(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.4747 of 2014)
BABU LAL MEENA ... Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF RAJASTHAN ... Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
This Court has in terms of two separate orders one passed in Criminal Appeal No.1121 of 2014 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.)No.3172 of 2014) – titled “Shriram v. State of Rajasthan” disposed of on 7th May, 2014 and the other passed in Criminal Appeals No.1628-1629 of 2014 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.)Nos.5105-5106 of 2014) – titled “Shankar Lal Meena v. State of Rajasthan through Anti Corruption Bureau, Jaipur” disposed of on 4th August, 2014, enlarged Shriram and Shankar Lal Meena, co-accused on bail on their furnishing respective bail bonds in a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.
We are told by learned counsel for the parties that out of 22 witnesses for the prosecution, only 5 have been examined so Signature Not Verified far, leaving the remaining 17 to be examined. Digitally signed by The appellant Mahabir Singh Date: 2014.09.16 11:55:07 IST herein has been in custody ever since 26th July, 2013. It is Reason:
obvious that the trial will take some more time to complete. In the circumstances and on a parity of reasoning, we allow 2 this appeal, set aside the order passed by the High Court and direct that the appellant shall be enlarged from custody in FIR No.340 of 2013 registered at P.S. Pradhan Aarakhsi Kendra, Anti Corruption Bureau, District Jaipur, Rajasthan, under Sections 7, 8, 10 & 13(1)(D) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, unless otherwise required in any other case, subject to his furnishing bail bonds in a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.
We make it clear that the appellant shall neither tamper with the evidence nor delay the trial in any manner. The trial court shall also make an endeavour to expedite the conclusion of the trial as far as possible within a period of one year.
.......................J (T.S. THAKUR) .......................J (R. BANUMATHI) NEW DELHI DATED 12th September, 2014.3
ITEM NO.46 COURT NO.3 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 4747/2014
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30/05/2014 in SBCRM No. 5401/2014 passed by the High Court Of Rajasthan At Jaipur) BABU LAL MEENA Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for bail and impleadment and office report) Date : 12/09/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain,Sr.Adv.
Mr. P.C.Jain,Adv.
Mr. Puneet Jain,Adv.
Mr. A. Vikram,Adv.
Mr. Abhinav Gupta,Adv.
Ms. Ankita Gupta,Adv.
Ms. Pratibha Jain,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. S.S.Shamshery,AAG Mr. Amit Sharma,Adv.
Mr. Varun Punia,Adv.
Ms. Ruchi Kohli,Adv.
Ms. Geeta Luthra,Sr.Adv.
Ms. Jomol Joy,Adv.
Mr. Snehashish Mukherjee, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
In terms of the signed order, this appeal is allowed: “...In the circumstances and on a parity of reasoning, we allow this appeal, set aside the order passed by the High Court and direct that the 4 appellant shall be enlarged from custody in FIR No.340 of 2013 registered at P.S. Pradhan Aarakhsi Kendra, Anti Corruption Bureau, District Jaipur, Rajasthan, under Sections 7, 8, 10 & 13(1)(D) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, unless otherwise required in any other case, subject to his furnishing bail bonds in a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.
We make it clear that the appellant shall neither tamper with the evidence nor delay the trial in any manner. The trial court shall also make an endeavour to expedite the conclusion of the trial as far as possible within a period of one year.” (Mahabir Singh) (Veena Khera) Court Master Court Master (Signed order is placed on the file)