Vikram @ Vinod Kumar vs State & Anr on 6 July, 2017

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 823 / 2017
Vikram @ Vinod Kumar S/o Sh. Girdhari Ram, By Caste Prajapat
(Kumar), Resident of Village Majiwala, Police Station- Balotra,
Tehsil Pachpadra, District Barmer (Raj.) (Wrongly Mentioned As
Resident of Village Ramseen Moongra, Tehsil Pachpadra, District
Barmer in the Order Impugned).

—-Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Rajasthan

2. Ghewar Chand S/o Sh. Bhera Ram, By Caste Prajapat Kumar,
Resident of Village Ramseen Moongra, Tehsil Pachpadra, District
Barmer (Raj.)

—-Respondents
__
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Pradeep Shah.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.K. Bohra, PP.

__
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Judgment / Order
06/07/2017

By way of this revision petition, the petitioner Vikram @

Vinod Kumar seeks to challenge the order dated 09.06.2017

passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Balotra in

Sessions Case No.3/2017 (54/2015) (C.I.S. No.2/2016) whereby

the learned trial court, on an application submitted under Section

319 Cr.P.C. proceeded to array the petitioner as an accused to face

trial alongwith other co-accused and issued warrant of arrest

against him.

Learned counsel Shri Shah urges that the main allegations of

the prosecution were against the husband, mother-in-law and
(2 of 3)

father in law namely Mohan Lal, Girdhari Ram and Smt. Bhanwari

Devi respectively. They were tried and convicted by the trial court.

Whilst convicting the mother-in-law and father-in-law by the

judgment dated 09.06.2017, the trial court has adopted an

unusual step of summoning the petitioner to face trial for the

offences under Sections 498A and 304B IPC and has issued

warrant of arrest against him. He urges that the petitioner be

given liberty to raise all his objections before the trial court but as

per him, the direction to summon the petitioner through warrant

of arrest is manifestly unjust because the allegation of admitted

prosecution are primarily against the husband, father-in-law and

mother-in-law all of whom have been enlarged on bail by this

Court while suspending their sentences in appeal. He thus urges

that the impugned order may be modified to the extent, warrant

of arrest was issued against the petitioner and he be permitted to

appear before the trial court and furnish bail and bonds for facing

trial.

Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the

submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

However, he too does not dispute the fact that the prosecution did

not file charge-sheet against the petitioner after investigation.

Charge-sheet was filed only against three accused persons namely

Girdhari Lal, Smt. Bhanwari Devi and Mohan Lal. These three

accused persons were convicted by the trial court after trial.

However, no step was taken during pendency of the trial to

summon the petitioner as an additional accused, even though,
(3 of 3)

evidence implicating him for the above offences was allegedly

deposed by the witnesses. Sentences awarded to three principal

accused persons have been suspended by this Court.

In this background, this Court is of the opinion that the ends

of justice requires that the direction to summon the petitioner

through a warrant of arrest be modified and he should be allowed

to appear before the trial court and furnish bail and bonds to its

satisfaction.

Thus, while upholding the order impugned dated 09.06.2017

to the extent the petitioner was summoned to face trial for the

above offences, the direction to summon him through warrant of

arrest is modified and instead, the petitioner shall now be

summoned through a bailable warrant in the sum of Rs.50,000/-.

He shall appear before the trial court within a period of six weeks

from today and furnish bail and bonds to its satisfaction

whereupon, he shall be enlarged on bail during pendency of trial.

The petitioner is given liberty to raise all his objections before the

trial court at the appropriate stage.

The revision petition as well as stay application are disposed

of in the above terms.

(SANDEEP MEHTA)J.

Tikam/107

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *