Shrawan Ram vs State & Anr on 11 December, 2009

                               1

S.B.CR.MISC. BAIL (CANCELLATION) APPLICATION NO. 25/2008
       (Shrawan Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.)



DATE OF ORDER            :     11th December 2009

       HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

Mr.Mahesh Thanvi for the applicant
Mr.Sunil Mehta for the non-applicant No.2
Mr.Mahipal Bishnoi, Public Prosecutor



       By way of this application, the applicant seeks

cancellation of bail granted by the Additional Sessions Judge,

Nagaur on 10.09.2008 to the non-applicant No.2 Hukma Ram

under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in relation to FIR No.79/2008 Police

Station, Khinvsar involving offences under Sections 366, 376

IPC.

       It has been informed that in this matter, charge-sheet

has been filed but charges are yet to be framed. It has further

been informed that S.B.Cr.Misc.Petitioin No.1032/2009 Hukma

Ram Vs. State is pending in this Court       as moved by the

accused in relation to the order passed by the learned Trial

Court declining to summon one DVD, allegedly carrying the

recording of the statement of prosecutrix.

       The learned counsel appearing for the applicant in this

application for cancellation of bail argues that the learned

Sessions Judge was not justified in granting bail to the
                                      2

     accused particularly when there are specific allegations made

     by the prosecutrix in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C.;

     and that mere suggestion about incongruity in the statements

     under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. could have hardly been

     taken sufficient for grant of bail for there being no contradiction

     on the material aspects of accusation.

           After having heard the learned counsel for the parties

     and after having taken into consideration the totality of facts

     and circumstances and the present status of the trial, this

     Court is unable to find the present one to be a case where

     continuing with the liberty of the      accused would not       be

     conducive to the fair trial of the matter nor could it be said that

     the bail plea was allowed by the learned Additional Sessions

     Judge, Nagaur on entirely irrelevant considerations.

           In the totality of circumstances, at this stage, and on the

     submissions as made, this Court does not find it justified to

     cancel the bail granted to the non-applicant.

           The application for cancellation of bail stands rejected.

           Of course, it is made clear that none of observations

     herein shall have any bearing on the merits of the case.



                                      (DINESH MAHESHWARI),J.

MK