POKAR RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
LAWS(RAJ)-1984-7-10
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on July 07,1984

POKAR RAM Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

MANI RAM AND ORS. V. IDAN AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
JAGRAM V. BHAMANDI AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
DELHI ADMN. V. SANJAY GANDHI [REFERRED TO]
BHAGIRATH SINGH JUDEJA V. STARE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
STATE VS. CAPTAIN JAGJIT SINGH [REFERRED TO]
GURCHARAN SINGH RAJ KUMAR SHARMA VS. STATE DELHI ADMINISTRATION :STATE DELHI ADMINISTRATION [REFERRED TO]
GURBAKSH SINGHSIBBIA SARBAJIT SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

V S NORTI VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-1989-2-2] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

S.K.MAL LODHA, J. - (1.)THIS is an application for cancellation of bail filed by Pokar Ram under Section 439(2), Cr. PC read with Section 482, Cr. PC.
(2.)IT may be stated that the Additional Sessions Judge No. I Jodhpur while exercising the powers of the Sessions Judge, Jodhpur on September 13 1983. accepted the application filed by non -petitioner No. 1, Chandansingh under Section 438, Cr.FC and passed the order for releasing him on bail in the event of his arrest.
Petitioner Pokar Ram lodged a report before the Additional Superintendent of Police, Jodhpur who, at the relevant time was holding the charge of Superintendent of Police. It was stated that on August 23 1983 at about 4.00 PM non -petitioner No. 1 Chandansingh and Shyam Singh sons of Shri Ranjeet Singh accompanied by master Harpal, Sukhram and Bhanwar Lal resident of village Anva came on a tractor to his field which is known as 'Talwada'. They started ploughing the field though crop of Baira and Gawer which was sown by him was standing on it. The wife of the petitioner's son came there and asked them not to plough the tractor in the field It has been stated that they started beating her. On hearing cries, the petitioner Pokar Ram went there but he was also given beating by them. The nose ring of the wife (Smt. Randu) of the petitioner's son Jagmal was forcibly snatched away. The petitioner is said to have gone to collect the persons of his 'Dhani' Non -petitioner No. 1 Chandansingh then came there armed with a gun and reached at the 'Dhani' of the complainant's son and fired gunshots on his son Bhanwaria, which are said to have struck on the stomach and chest of Bhanwaria. He became unconscious, His mother Harsukha (son) and Kalia, who is his brother's son were also injured. The report of the incident was submitted before the Additional Superintendent of Police, Jodhpur. After investigation, a case under Sections 207, 441 147 147, 149, 378 and 323, IPC, was registered and further investigation commenced' Bhanwaria was admitted in Mahatma Gandhi Hospital, Jodhpur on August 24,1983. He remained there as an indoor patient. He, however died subsequently. After his death, the offence was converted into one under Section 30; IPC. Non -petitioner No. 1 Chandansingh submitted an application under Section 438 Cr. IC. on September 29, 1983 before the Sessions Judge Jodhpur. That application was however, decided on September 30 1983 by Additional Sessions Judge, No. 1 Jodhpur, who was holding charge of the Sessions Judge, Jodhpur. Vide order dated September 30, 1983 the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Jodhpur, allowed the application and granted anticipatory bail to non -applicant No. 1. The complainant Pokar Ram has filed this application for cancellation of bail on October 5, 1983, stating that in the facts and circumstances of the case and further having regard to the gravity of the offence the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Jodhpur, should not have granted anticipatory bail to non -petitioner No 1 and, therefore, it should be cancelled. 3. Notice of this application was issued to non -petitioner No. 1 Chandan Singh as well as to the State of Rajasthan. Non -petitioner No. 1 Chandan Singh has filed reply to the application dated February 23,1984 opposing the prayer made by the complainant -petitioner for cancellation of J toe bail granted to him.

(3.)AMONGST other objections, an objection was also raised that the complainant -petitioner has no locus -standi to move the application for cancellation of bail. After that the complainant has filed affidavit on Februiry 29, (984 controverting the allegations made in the reply which was filed by non -petitioner No. 1. Non -petitioner No. 1 submitted affidavits of Budda Ram, Ranjeetsingh. Chandansingh, Gokharam, Bhakar Ram and Rugharam on March 21, 1984. Learned Counsel for the petitioner filed three affidavits of (1) Pokar Ram; (2) Bhagchand; and (5) Bhakar Ram on March 22, 1984. Thereafter non -petitioner No. 1 submitted as application on March 23, 1984 praying that the petitioner may be summoned and non -petitioner No. I may be permitted to cross -examine him. This application was opposed by filling reply on March 29, 1984. a application was also moved on March 29, 1984 on of non -petitioner No. 2 to put on record the affidavits of Rugharam, Unkrasingh. Nenaram, Rajuram, Haralal, Motiram, Bheraram, Amluram, Sonaram Dhokalram and the doucuments. This is the material on record.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.