BABULAL SON OF GANESHRAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material made available to me during the arguments of the case.

(2.) Contention of learned counsel for petitioner is that although learned court below rejected petitioner's bail application on the ground of pendency of eight cases against him but in fact there are only six cases registered against him and in those cases also he was made accused after his arrest was initially made in FIR No.75/2010 for offence under Section 3/25 of the Arms Act. He was then made accused in five other cases. His arrest in the present case was procured by production warrant on 9th February, 2010. The investigation of the case throughout proceeded for offence under Section 379 IPC and accordingly if the challan was not filed within 60 days the petitioner was liable to be enlarged on bail by virtue of mandatory provision contained in Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. However, when the petitioner applied for grant of bail on this ground on 06.05.2010 the investigating agency, as would be evident from the note put up by the investigating officer in the case-diary, added offence under Section 413 IPC so as to take the matter out of purview of Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. Learned counsel cited the judgment of this Court in Hari Kishan Vs. State of Rajasthan, 2005 (1) R.C.C. 282, wherein in similar circumstances when a graver offence was subsequently added by the Investigating Officer without any basis to save himself from departmental action for not filing charge-sheet within 60 days, this Court was persuaded to enlarge him on bail. The learned counsel submitted that the petitioner would undertake to maintain good behaviour and not indulge in any offence in future. He is in jail for last more than three-and-a-half month; challan has already been filed; trial of the case would take a long; in two other cases the petitioner has already been granted bail by the court below itself.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.