Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Rotan Singh vs State Of Rajasthan Through Pp on 29 May, 2018
Author: Pankaj Bhandari
Bench: Pankaj Bhandari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail No. 2992/2018
Rotan Singh S/o Madan Singh B/c Rajput, Aged About 25 Years,
R/o Banethi, Tehsil Kotputli, Distt. Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through P.p.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : None present
For Respondent(s) : None present
For Complainant Mr.Mahesh Chand Meena present in
person.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI
Judgment / Order
29/05/2018
1. In "Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal versus Union of India and Anr. 2003 (2) SCC 45, Apex Court has held that lawyers have no right to go on strike or to give a call for boycott of Courts. Calls given by Bar Association or Bar Council for such purpose cannot require the Court to adjourn the matters. In "Krishnakant Tamrakar Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh" decided by the Apex Court on 28.3.2018. The Apex Court has held that strike by advocates is in violation of law laid down by the Apex Court and the same tantamounts to contempt. The Apex Court has further held that the office bearers are liable to be removed from the office for passing resolution for strike. In view of the judgment of Apex Court in Ex.Captain Harish Uppal Vs. Union of India and "Krishnakant Tamrakar Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh", since the advocates are abstaining from work since 21.5.2018, this Court deems it proper to pass order on merits.
(2 of 2) [CRLMB-2992/2018]
2. Petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
3. F.I.R. No.325/2017 was registered at Police Station Paniyala, Jaipur District for offence under Sections 376 and 306 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act and Section 3 (2) (V) of SC/ST Act.
4. I have perused the record.
5. As per the complainant who is present in person deceased has committed suicide on 19.11.2017. As per the complainant deceased was cremated by the family members. From the FIR it is revealed that complainant was present at the time of funeral. There is no reason why postmortem was not got conducted. Chances of getting a suicide note written by the deceased cannot be ruled out. Petitioner is serving in the army, hence, I am inclined to allow the anticipatory bail application.
6. The Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed. The S.H.O./I.O./Arresting Authority, Police Station Paniyala, Jaipur District in F.I.R. No. 325/2017, is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner he shall be released on bail, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to his satisfaction on the following conditions:-
(I). that the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). that the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer, and
(iii). that the petitioner shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.
(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J teekam/27