FUA RAM AND ANR. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the Applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Petitioner and co -accused persons, namely, Anil Vyas and Nathmal Prajapat were summoned in connection with FIR case No. 1/2004 of Police Station Bali and in Criminal Original Case No. 261/2006 by warrant of arrest. The said order of issuance of warrant of arrest was passed by the learned A.C.J.M, Bali on 25.11.2006. The co -accused persons, namely, Anil Vyas and Nathmal Prajapat, Anop Singh, Raju Singh and Gajendra Singh approached the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bali for issuance of directions Under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure and the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bali directed the conversion of the warrant of arrest to summons by his order dated 22.12.2010.

(3.) THE learned Addl. Sessions Judge appears to have made a strange approach while rejecting the present application inasmuch as he has converted warrant of arrest into summons for those co -accused persons, who are in Government service but simply because the two Petitioners, who are before this Court in the present application, were/are not in Government service, their warrant of arrests have been sustained. This approach of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge seems to be absolutely unfair and cannot be appreciated. It is also noticed that when the merit of the case is similar then no discrimination can be made because one person is in Government service and other is not.