SANTOSH & ORS. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the accused petitioners and learned P.P.

(2.) Shri Bajawa submits that this is a Second Bail application on behalf of the accused petitioners. Earlier, the first Bail Application No. 3636/91 was decided by this Court on 25th Oct., 1991 and on that day it was given out that the Bail Application under Sec. 438 Cr P.C. has been rejected by the Sessions Judge. Karauli on the ground that the learned Public Prosecutor made a can did statement before him that the offence against the accused was not non-bailable and consequently the application was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Karoli. In the order dated 25th Oct., 1991, it has been mentioned that it was wrong apprehension of the petitioner that the police shall now convert the case into a non-bailable offence and the court expressed the opinion that once a statement is made by the public Prosecutor after going through the case diary, if any conversion is to be made and the accused is to be arrested, it is expected that the warrant shall be obtained from the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate or the concerned court for arresting the accused persons and in case the law in circumvented, the investigating officer shall do it at his own risk. With these observations, the first bail application No. 3626/91 was disposed of.

(3.) Shri Bajawa has pointed out that after the First Bail Application was disposed on 25th Oct., 1991 as aforesaid, the warrant was obtained against the petitioners within three days by converting the offence into non-bailable offence i.e. under Sec. 326 Penal Code on the basis of X-Ray report dated 12th Oct., 1991 when the first bail application was decided by this court.