Rajasthan High Court
Gopal Saini S/O Shri Roopa vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 November, 2021
Bench: Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. 5th Bail Application No. 17392/2021
Gopal Saini S/o Shri Roopa, R/o Bisalpur Road, Ward No. 5,
Todaraisingh, Distt. Tonk. (Confined In Central Jail Ajmer)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Rakesh Kumar
For Respondent(s) : Mr.Mangal Singh Saini
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Judgment / Order
08/11/2021
The instant 5th bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C has
been preferred on behalf of the petitioner, who is in judicial
custody in connection with FIR No.239/2015, P.S. Nasirabad
Sadar, Ajmer for the offence under Sections 8/20 and 8/29 of
Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. Perused the material
available on record.
As a matter of fact, this is 5th bail application preferred on
behalf of petitioner Gopal Saini. The 4th bail application bearing
SBCr.Misc. 4th Bail Appl. No. 3271/2020 came to be rejected by
this court vide order dated 14.5.2020 observing the involvement
of the petitioner in the case where recovery of commercial
quantity of contraband was found. The petitioner has failed to
(2 of 4) [CRLMB-17392/2021]
show any significant change in the circumstance after rejection of
4th bail application. The instant 5th bail application is nothing but a
review of the order dated 14.5.2020 which is not permissible
under the law. Therefore, I am not inclined to grant bail to the
present petitioner.
Accordingly, in view of above, the instant 5th bail application
is disposed of with the aforesaid observations.
A perusal of the record of the case reveals that the matter is
pending before the trial court since 2015, and more than 6 years
have elapsed but the trial could not have been completed. As per
the list of the witnesses attached with the charge-sheet, 40
witnesses have been projected by the prosecution, out of which,
most of the witnesses are public servants being the police officials,
surprisingly no effective steps have been taken to conclude the
trial. Thus it is a case of infringment of fundamental right as
guaranteed by the Constitution of India as every accused has a
fundamental right of speedy trial.
It is not clear from the material available on record that who
is responsible for the delay occurred during the course of trial;
whether the witnesses are not being summoned properly by the
learned trial court, or though the same are being issued to the
witnesses but they are not appearing before the court for their
cross-examination in trial. Yet, the things have remained
undisputed that the petitioner is facing pending trial incarceration
since last more than six years. The responsibility to ensure that
(3 of 4) [CRLMB-17392/2021]
the witnesses remain attended when they are summoned, is that
of the prosecution.
This court has repeatedly issued directions to the Director
General of Police to ensure that the official witnesses more
particularly of the police department should remain present when
they are summoned to depose before the trial court. Reference in
this regard may be made to the order dated 1.12.2015 passed by
the Principal Seat at Jodhpur in SBCr.Misc.Bail Appl. No.
9568/2015 (Ganesh Ram Vs.State of Raj.). However, it seems
that these directions are being rampantly flouted regularly. From
the facts noted above, it is apparent that prosecution has failed to
fulfill the obligation caste upon as to secure the attendance of the
witnesses for deposing before the trial court, but because of the
lackadaisical approach of the prosecution, the accused petitioner
continued to languish in jail for more than six years. Here only half
of the projected witnesses could have been examined till date thus
the conclusion of the trial may take further long time.
In this background, and having regard to the entirety of the
facts & circumstances of the cases, this court directs the trial court
to expedite the trial, and try to get it disposed as early as
possible. At the same time, directions are issued to the Director
General of Police, Jaipur to look into the matter and pass an
appropriate instructions to the Nodal Officer as appointed by him
in accordance with the directions passed by this court in Ganesh
Ram's case (supra) to ensure the attendance of the police officials
before the trial court as and when they are summoned to adduce
evidence before the trial court.
(4 of 4) [CRLMB-17392/2021]
Let a copy of this order be directly sent to the concerned trial
Court as well as the Director General of Police, Jaipur for
compliance as aforesaid.
(FARJAND ALI),J
SANDEEP RAWAT /23/30
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
