9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 1322X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the findings that the Learned Trial Court was not satisfied with the grounds so taken, is vitiated by non-application of mind; when, the plea was not denied/or is admitted by the non-applicant - complainant also. Thus, the impugned order dated 23.04.2024, passed by the Learned Trial Court i.e. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, is quashed and set aside. Since the petitioner-accused is in judicial custody , therefore, the Respondents/State Authorities are directed to release the petitioner-accused [Dipender Thakur] from custody, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Learned Trial Court. Thus, the instant petition as well as the pending miscellaneous application(s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ef Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, (HP), on which, the cognizance was taken by the Court and the petitioneraccused [Dipender Thakur], was directed to appear and consequently, the petitioner-accused appeared and furnished the personal/surety bonds before the Learned Trial Court. Learned counsel further submits that the matter was again listed on 17.01.2024, on which date the petitioner could not appear before the Learned Trial Court, as he was suffering from fever. Due to non-appearance of the petitioner on 17.01.2024, the Learned Trial Court issued the Non Bailable Warrants [NBW s], so as to ensure the presence of the bail petitioner for 08.05.2024. 5. Though the Learned Trial Court had issued the Non Bailable Warrants [NBW s] on 17.01.2024 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs on two grounds; firstly, once the Non Bailable Warrants [NBW s] were issued on 17.01.2024, directing the production of the petitioner - accused [Dipender Thakur] for 08.052024 but, the petitioner appeared on surrender before the Learned Trial Court on 23.04.2024, then in these circumstances, the only option available was to cancel the Non Bailable Warrants [NBW s] issued by it but the refusal to cancel the Non Bailable Warrants [NBW s], despite appearance, on surrender defeats the object and rationale of issuing Non Bailable Warrants [NBW s], in Section 70(2) Cr.P.C. whereby, the primary object of the Court for issuing NBW s is to ensure the presence of the accused. Accordingly, in facts of this case, once the petitioner-accused, against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... granting bail, which has been ignored by the Learned Trial Court, in the instant case. 9. Besides the above, in peculiar facts of this case, while filing the application under Section 70(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the specific stand was taken that the non appearance, was on account of the ailment of the petitioner-accused and once this fact has not been denied or controverted by the non-applicant/complainant, therefore, on this ground also, the Impugned Order dated 23.04.2024, (Annexure P-3), by recording the findings that the Learned Trial Court was not satisfied with the grounds so taken, is vitiated by non-application of mind; when, the plea was not denied/or is admitted by the non-applicant - complainant also. In view of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
