RAM AVATAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the papers made available to me including the case diary.

(2.) In this application for bail, under S. 439 Crimial P.C. the allegations made against the petitioner and is about cruelty and dowry death. The accused was arrested on 16th Jan., 1992. He moved an application for bail under S. 439 Crimial P.C. before the trial-court, which was rejected on 20th Jan., 1992. He thereafter, moved an application before this court, wherein an interim bail was prayed for and granted on humanitarian consideration. Thereafter, he surrendered. The accused petitioner was in judicial custody granted to him by the learned Addl. CJM. Hindaun City and the last remand was to expire on 22nd April, 92, but prior to that 90 days were coming to an end from the date of arrest of the accused on 16th April, 1992. On 13th April, 1992, the challan was ready and it was presented by the APP before the Addl. C.J.M, Hindaun City, but the learned ACJM mentioned in the order sheet that the accused is in judicial custody upto 22nd April, 1992, hence, the challan should be submitted on 22nd April, 1992, which is the date fixed. He also observed that the copy of the charge-sheet meant for the accused petitioner is not accompanied. Thus, neither copy of charge-sheet was given to the accused on 13th April, 1992 nor any steps in the direction of "Taking cognizance of offence" was taken. A mechanical adjournment was granted by the learned ACJM.

(3.) It may be observed that charge-sheet was then filed on 22nd April, 1992 and in support of this contention an affidavit by Kanchanlal Meena, father of the accused-petitioner had also been filed.