Sukumar S/O Sh. Krishanpat vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2646 Raj/2

[2023/RJJP/003719]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

     S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 263/2023

Sukumar S/o Sh. Krishanpat, Aged About 38 Years, R/o
Mugrayal, Police Station Tahepur District Nadiya, West Bangal.
(At Present Confined In District Jail Sikar)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P
                                                                 ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)          :    None present
For Respondent(s)          :    Mr. Naina Ram, PP



           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

                                     Order

03/03/2023

1. En "Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal versus Union of India and Anr.

2003(2) SCC 45, Apex Court has held that lawyers have no right

to got on strike or to give a call for bocott of Courts. Calls given by

Bar Association or Bar Council for such purpose cannot require the

Court to adjourn the matters. In "Krishnakant Tamrakar Versus

The State of Maddhya Pradesh" decided by the Apex Court on

28.03.20218. The Apex Court has held that strike by advocates is

in violation of law laid down by the Apex Court and the same

tentamounts to contempt. The Apex Court has further held that

the office bearers are liable to be removed from the office for

passing resolution for strike. In view of the judgment of Apex

Court in Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal 3401 and 'Krishnakant Tamrakar

Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh" since the advocates are

[2023/RJJP/003719] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-263/2023]

abstaining from work since 21.02.2023, this Court deems it proper

to pass order on merits.

2. The petitioner has filed this bail application under Section

439 of Cr.P.C.

3. F.I.R. No.203/2021 was registered at Police Station Khatu

Shyamji, District Sikar for offences under Sections 420 & 406 IPC.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail

application and submits that in planned manner, the complainant

and other persons have been cheated by the petitioner.

5. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case

and especially the fact that the alleged offences are triable by

magistrate and that the accused is in jail since 01.12.2022 and

trial of the case will take considerable time, I deem it proper to

allow the instant bail application.

6. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed

that accused-petitioner shall be released on bail provided he

furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees

One Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum of

Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each to the satisfaction

of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear

before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred,

on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to

do so.

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

ANAND TANWAR /17

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)