Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Vijay Kumar Devgan S/O Shri Deshraj ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 January, 2020
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3234/2019
Vijay Kumar Devgan S/o Shri Deshraj Devgan, Aged About 60
Years, R/o Rewari, Haryana, At Present Jodhpur, Raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prem Shanker Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arvind Bhadu, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA Order 08/01/2020 The petitioner by way of this petition assails the order dated 30th July, 2018 & order dated 3.10.2018 passed in revision petition whereby application moved by him u/s 70(2) Cr.P.C for converting non bailable warrants into bailable warrants was rejected.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is suffering from liver disease since 24th April, 2016 and he is under treatment. The petitioner is 69 years old person. The case was registered against him u/s 19(1)A of the Fertilizer Control Act, 1985 and u/s 3/7 Essential Commodities Act. The petitioner was on bail but thereafter he was unable to present himself on account of aforesaid illness and his bail bonds were forfeited and non bailable warrants were issued. In the circumstances, the petitioner appear through his counsel and moved an application u/s 70(2) Cr.P.C. for converting non bailable warrants to bailable (Downloaded on 16/02/2020 at 08:48:06 AM) (2 of 2) [CRLMP-3234/2019] warrants which has been rejected by the court below and revision petition has also dismissed.
Learned counsel submits that on account of bonafide reasons as above, the petitioner could not appear and the provision u/s 70(2) Cr.P.C. must be applied liberally.
Heard learned PP who is opposes the submission made by the petitioner.
I have considered the submissions.
This court finds that the reasons for non appearance of the petitioner is bonafide and genuine.
Keeping in view the nature of the case and law as laid down settled by this court from time to time, this court finds that the order passed by the learned trial court is erroneous. The petitioner ought to be granted liberty in terms of section 70(2) Cr.P.C and and he is also to be kept present himself before the trial court.
Keeping in view thereof, the application moved u/s 70(2) Cr.P.C. is allowed. The order passed by the trial court dated 30 th July, 2018 and order passed by Learned Session Judge 3.10.2018 are set aside. The petitioner shall be present on 22.1.2020 before the trial court alongwith bail bonds and also participate regularly in the proceedings.
The cr.misc. Petition is accordingly allowed.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J Anu /397 (Downloaded on 16/02/2020 at 08:48:06 AM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)