SHYAM LAL @ GHANSHYAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is an accused in a case where offences are under Sections 504 and 509 IPC. He remained absent on 28.6.1982. His counsel was also not present, hence the Court ordered the issue of non-bailable warrants after forefeiting his bail and bonds. The petitioner has now submitted that he was appointed as a Sepoy by the Inspector General of Prisons Rajasthan and was posted at Udaipur and therefore had asked his counsel to seek exemption from personal attendance. His counsel, however, failed to appear and did not inform him about the proceedings.

(2.) It is apparent that the petitioner himself has been very negligent in so much so he never cared to contact his counsel and find out as to what was happening in the case. Now he is posted at Jaipur but even then he did not try to find out about the case. How he arranged to evade the non-bailable warrants for seven years can be found out only from the record of the case.

(3.) Instead of delaying the proceedings further, the petitioner can be given one more opportunity as he is a Government Servant, but this time fresh conditions will have to be imposed so that he does not jump bail again.