PARAMJEET KAUR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this application filed under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C., the petitioner complainant seeks cancellation of bail granted to the respondent No.2 accused Jagjeet Singh by this Court vide order dated 2.6.2016.

(2.) Shri N.L.Joshi learned counsel for the petitioner complainant vehemently urges that the petitioner's counsel made gross misstatement of fact while arguing the third bail application on behalf of the petitioner. He contends that only two witnesses remained to be examined when the petitioner was granted bail by this Court vide order dated 2.6.2016 whereas, the petitioner's counsel portrayed before this Court that almost 24 witnesses were to be examined. He thus urges that the order granting bail to the respondent accused should be recalled and the bail granted to him be cancelled.

(3.) Per contra, Shri J.S.Khinchi learned counsel for the respondent No.2 accused vehemently opposes the submissions advanced by the petitioner complainant's counsel. He contends that the assertions made by Shri Joshi seeking cancellation of bail granted to the accused are totally unfounded. It is not in dispute that 35 witnesses were cited by the prosecution in the list of witnesses. The trial had been reached to a fag end as against the respondent whereafter, the application submitted on behalf of the complainant under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was allowed and de-novo trial ordered. In such do novo trial, only 11 witnesses had been examined out of 35 cited witnesses when the third bail application was moved. There is no specific order of the trial Court by which it could be inferred that any significant number of witnesses had been given up by the prosecution as on the date when the third application for bail came to be decided. He submits that it is further undisputed that the accused had suffered custodial period in excess of 5 years and 7 months which was the main ground on which his bail application was allowed. He further submits that there is no allegation in the entire bail cancellation application that the accused misused the liberty of bail granted to him. He further points out that now the trial is at the fag end and only the defence evidence remains to be recorded. He thus prays that the application for cancellation of bail deserves to be dismissed.