MAHESH KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS bail application u/s. 438, Cr. P. C. , has been filed for release of petitioner-Mahesh Kumar Sharma on bail for transit period. He has been summoned through arrest warrant in a case for offence u/s. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 to appear in Court. He has been declined bail by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 1, Jaipur District, Jaipur vide order dated 28. 4. 2005.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is a handicapped person who could not appear in the concerned Court of Tamil Nadu in compliance of the summons issued to him due to his economic and family problem; as a result of which, non-bailable warrant has been issued against him. The offence is bailable one and is triable by a Magistrate of Ist Class. In this connection, he has placed reliance on the case of Chandan Mal J. Jain vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. reported in 2001 (1) RCrd 504 (Raj.), wherein it has been held by this Court in an identical case that transit bail may be granted to the accused-petitioner against whom there is a complaint for offence u/s. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and against whom non-bailable warrant has been issued. He has also referred to the case of Neela J. Shaha vs. State of Gujarat, 1998 (2) Crimes 261, Ashvini Bharti Dhirajlal Bharti & Anr. vs. State of Gujarat, in Criminal Misc. Application No. 187/2002 and Daya Shankar Mishra vs. State, S. B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 011/2004 (D) decided on 5. 2. 2004, wherein interpreting the sacrosant principle enshrined in the maxim "audi alteram partem" and considering the value of liberty and pernicious effect its deprivation has on the life of an individual, it has been held in all these cases that the transitory bail can be granted to an accused who reasonably apprehends his arrest and who resides within the jurisdiction of the Court and he case against him is pending investigation in the jurisdiction of the Court and he case against him is pending investigation in the jurisdiction of another High Court to provide him immediate relief so as to enable him to approach the concerned Court having jurisdiction for his release on anticipatory bail, however, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case against him.