Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Rajpal vs The State Of Rajasthan on 5 March, 2018
Bench: Ranjan Gogoi, R. Banumathi
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 328-331 OF 2018
[ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL)
NO.6006-6009 OF 2016]
RAJPAL ...APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. ETC. ...RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 332-334 OF 2018
[ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL)
NO.465-467 OF 2018]
ORDER
SLP(CRL) NO.6006-6009 OF 2016
1. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
2. Leave granted.
3. This Court by order dated 15th July, 2016 in Criminal Appeal No.669 of 2016 (@ SLP(CRL.) NO.1163/2015) [Rajpal Vs. Krishan Kumar & Ors.) and other connected case had interfered with the orders of the High Court releasing three of the co-accused on bail. The offence(s) for which the accused respondents have been convicted is under Section Signature Not Verified 302 IPC. If this Court had as far back as on 15 th Digitally signed by VINOD LAKHINA Date: 2018.03.06 17:30:55 IST Reason: 2 July, 2016 taken the view that the bail granted to co-accused during the pendency of the appeal(s) was not justified we do not see how we can take a different view in respect the present accused respondents.
4. Consequently, we allow the present appeals; set aside the orders of the High Court of Rajasthan; cancel the bail granted to the accused respondents and direct that the accused respondents be taken into custody forthwith. SLP(CRL) NO.465-467 OF 2018
1. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and considered the matter.
2. Leave granted.
3. The crime committed (punishable under Section 302 IPC) was while the accused respondents were on bail during the pendency of the appeal(s) challenging their conviction under Section 302 IPC in connection with another case. As the offence in respect of which bail has been granted was committed while the accused respondents were on 3 bail granted by the High Court we are of the view that the order of the High Court granting bail to the accused respondents in the present case(s) was not justified. Accordingly we allow the present appeals; set aside the order of the High Court; cancel the bail granted to the accused respondents and direct that they be taken into custody forthwith.
....................,J.
(RANJAN GOGOI) ...................,J.
(R. BANUMATHI)
NEW DELHI
MARCH 05, 2018
4
ITEM NO.42 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). 6006-
6009/2016
(ARISING OUT OF IMPUGNED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 29-01-
2015, 16-02-2015, 27-02-2015 IN SBCMSBA NOS. 619/2015, 1507/2015, SBCMTBA NO. 1761/2015 AND SBCMSBA NO. 2107/2015 PASSED BY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR) RAJPAL PETITIONER(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.ETC. RESPONDENT(S) WITH SLP(CRL) NO. 465-467/2018 (II) Date : 05-03-2018 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Jasbir Singh Malik, Adv.
Ms. Usha Nandini. V, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Mr. Anish Roy, Adv.
Mr. Kunal Verma, Adv.
Mrs. Yugandhara Pawar Jha, Adv. Mr. Piyush Bhardwaj, Adv.
Mr. Ajay Choudhary, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.5
The appeals are allowed in terms of the signed order.
[VINOD LAKHINA] [ASHA SONI]
AR-cum-PS BRANCH OFFICER
[SIGNED ORDER IS PLACED ON THE FILE]