ARVIND SAMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Sections 439, 440 (1) and 482 Crimial P.C. against the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Ajmer dated 8th March, 1978.

(2.) The accused-petitioner Arvind Kumar is facing trial of the offences under Sec. 170, 406, 419, 420 read with Sec. 120-B, IPC. The learned Sessions Judge, Ajmer by his order dated 8th March, 1978, ordered that the accused-petitioner may be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 20,000.00 with two sureties of Rs. 10,000.00 each. It was further directed that the sureties should be the resident of Rajasthan holding property in the district of Ajmer. It is against these two restrictions that the present petition has been preferred.

(3.) The learned counsel for the accused-petitioner has contended that the learned Sessions Judge, Ajmer on 19th Oct., 1977, in case No. 857/1974, directed the accused to be released on his executing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000.00 and furnishing two sureties in the sum of Rs. 5,000.00 each to the satisfaction of the Additional Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate, Ajmer (West). In this order, it was contended, no such conditions were imposed that the sureties must be of Rajasthan holding property within the district of Ajmer. Reliance was placed on Raghunandan Vs. Emperor, AIR 1922 All 489 , wherein it was held that an order directing an accused person to produce sureties residing within a certain limit is illegal, because Magistrate has no authority to lay down any limits within which sureties must reside. Reliance was also placed on a decision of this Court in S. B. Criminal Revision No. 588 of 1972 Lal Chand Vs. State (A photostat copy of this' judgment has been produced). In this case placing reliance on Raghunandan Vs. Emperor, AIR 1922 All 489 , it was held that the Magistrate had no jurisdiction to place a restriction that the surety should reside within the jurisdiction of that Court. Attention of this court was also drawn to the order dated 17th Jan., 1978, in S. B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 454/1977 Mohd. Jatneei Quareshi Vs. State. A similar order has also been passed in S. B. Cr. Misc. Bail Application No. 452 of 1977, Mohammed Jameel Quareshi Vs. State of Rajasthan. In this order, it was stated that the persons appearing as sureties for the accused should belong to Rajasthan end must have their properties within the territorial limits of Ajmer district. It was, therefore, contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that the restrictions which have been imposed by the learned Sessions Judge regarding the residence of the sureties and that they should have properties in the district of Ajmer are without jurisdiction.