Munnaram vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant and also perused the material available on record.

The trial court vide judgment dated 1.9.2015 convicted the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act and sentenced him to undergo one year's simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs.8,00,000/-, in default of payment of fine further to undergo 3 moths' simple imprisonment.

Against the said judgment of the trial court, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, No.2, Jodhpur Metropolitan (for short 'the appellate court') which is pending consideration. During the pendency of the said appeal, as per direction of the appellate court, the petitioner failed to appear before it on 17.4.2018 and, therefore, his bail bonds were forfeited and he was summoned through warrant of arrest.

The petitioner approached this Court by way of filing S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.3819/2018, which came to be disposed of by this Court vide order dated 3.11.2018 with a direction to the petitioner to surrender before the appellate court on 19.11.2018. Pursuant to that, the petitioner surrendered before the appellate court and moved a bail application which was dismissed vide order dated 19.11.2018. Therefore, now the petitioner has moved this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has failed to appear before the appellate court due to unavoidable circumstances and, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that as a matter of fact, the petitioner wants to linger on the hearing of appeal and, therefore, he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. He has submitted that the appeal pending before the appellate court is fixed for hearing since 17.10.2015 but the petitioner is not interested in getting the said appeal decided and is lingering on the matter. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 has further submitted that he has no objection, if the petitioner is released on bail, but he may be directed to get the appeal decided expeditiously which is pending in the appellate court.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner assures this Court that the appeal filed by the petitioner would be finally argued on behalf of the petitioner on or before 7th January, 2019.

Taking into consideration the assurance given by learned counsel for the petitioner, this bail application is allowed and it is directed that petitioner Munnaram S/o late Shri Sewaram Ji shall be released on bail provided he executes a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.25,000/-each to the satisfaction of learned appellate court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.

It is made clear that if the petitioner or his counsel fails to argue the appeal pending before the appellate court finally by 07th of January, 2019, the respondent No.2 is free to move application for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.