RAMESH CHANDER Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Several opportunities were given to the respondents to file objections, including the last opportunity. Till date, however, they have not filed the objections. This is an application for grant of bail by the petitioner Romesh Chander in pending trial under S. 304 RPC. Romesh Chander is facing trial along with three other persons. all the four accused had approached this court earlier also in bail application No. 182/89 for grant of bail and this Court vide order dtd. 31-1-1989 had released the other three accused on bail. In so far as Ramesh Chander was concerned, this Court had declined his prayer for grant of bail and had observed that such prayer would be considered by the trial Court after recording the statement of the eye witnesses. While disposing of the bail application, the Court had also observed then, that it came out from the F.I.R. that petitioner Romesh Chander had inflicted injuries with sharp edged weapons to Biso Ram deceased.

(2.) Mr. Goni, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has drawn my attention to various orders passed from time to time by the trial Court and has submitted that in spite of the trial remaining pending for a long time, the prosecution has negligently and callously not concluded its evidence with the result that the petitiner is languishing in custody for no fault of his.

(3.) During the course of the hearing of this application, I came across an order dt. 14-2-1991 passed by the Ist Addl. Sessions Judge, Jammu, whereby he had refused to hear and try this case on the ground that the criminal clerk of his court was related to one of the accused persons and he had accordingly referred the matter to Sessions Judge Jammu, who transfered the case to Addl. Sessions Judge, Jammu. I had called the explanation of the 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Jammu. he has submitted his explanation wherein it has been pointed out that on 14-2-1991 Prakash Chand and Satish Kumar PWs were present in the court. Prakash Chand PW who is also complainant in the case, pointed out that Jamit Raj accused No. 4 was the cousin of Sardari Lal, criminal clerk of the Court of Ist Addl Sessions Judge, Jammu. The Presiding Officer also explained that in order to alley the apprehensions of the complainant and also in the interest of justice and fitness of things the case was sent back to the learned Sessions Judge with a request to transfer the same to some other court.