STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. TARA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE learned Single Judge of this court (Hon'ble V. K. Singhal) while disposing bail application No. 5752 of 1994, Sarjeet Kumar vs. State of Rajasthan on 14. 12. 1994, directed the Registry as under : (i) That all the pending bail applications arising out of one FIR or complaint should be listed together irrespective of the fact as to whether the different co-accused are represented by one advocate or more than one: (ii) If the bail application/applications have been received subsequently to the disposal of earlier bail application of the other co-accused it should as far as possible be listed before that very Judge who has decided the bail application of other co- accused. (iii) That if one bail application has been rejected and for any reason the bail application of other co-accused is not heard and listed or decided then irrespective of- the fact as to before which bench the bail application is listed, the Registry shall put a note on the order sheet that the bail application of the co-accused has been accepted or rejected. "

(2.) WHEN the matter came up before another Single Judge, namely, Hon'ble Mr. Justice N. C. Kochhar, he was of the opinion that from the order passed by Hon'ble Justice Singhal, it appears that Rule 65 of the Rules of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, 1952 (hereinafter to be referred as the Rules) was not brought to his notice, as in accordance with the said rule, it has been practice of this court that if one application moved by the same accused has been dealt with by one particular Bench, all subsequent applications of the same accused are put up before the same Bench, but if an accused person, who is co-accused in the same case but has moved the first bail application it is listed before the regular Bench. Hon'ble Justice N. C. Kochhar suggested that the matter be referred to a larger Bench, upon which the present Bench has been constituted by Hon'ble the Chief Justice.

(3.) MR. Pareek has taken the matter further and according to him even the application on the same accused whose previous application has been dismissed should not be listed before the same Bench because the second application is moved in changed circumstances and the matter is to be viewed from a different angle which can be done by any Judge.