Hon'ble SHARMA, J.—By filing instant criminal misc. petition the petitio-ner has challenged the order dated 21.7.2010 passed by Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No.12, Jaipur City, Jaipur (for short 'the trial court') by which he rejected the application moved by the petitioner under Section 70(2) Cr.P.C.

2. Brief facts of the case are that an FIR was lodged against the petitioner and four other persons at P.S. Moti Dungari for the offence u/Ss 147, 323 and 336 IPC on 30.7.1998. Thereafter, the police submitted charge-sheet under the aforesaid offences on 18.11.1998. On 24.3.2005 the trial Court forfeited the bail bonds of the petitioner and issued arrest warrant against him. Thereafter, the petitioner moved an application under Section 70(2) Cr.P.C. which the trial Court dismissed the same vide order dated 21.7.2010.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at the time of occurrence the petitioner was a student and after that he started to work in a private firm at Delhi. He is suffering from Cardiac disease and for that purpose he has annexed with this petition the medical prescriptions. He submits that the petitioner is neither a previous convicted person nor a habitual offender and he is a social person.

4. Learned PP seriously opposed the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the trial court has rightly passed the order impugned and the order passed by the trial Court need no interference of this Court.

5. From a bare perusal of the case file it is clear that non-appearance of the petitioner before the trial Court was bona-fide and not intentional.

6. In the result this criminal misc. petition stands disposed of and the order dated 21.7.2010 passed by Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 12, Jaipur City, Jaipur is modified with the following directions:

1. If the petitioner submits bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties of Rs. 12,500/- each to the satisfaction of the trial Court, then he be enlarged on bail;

2. Before furnishing the bail bonds the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs. 5,000/- as fine under section 446 Cr.P.C. before the trial Court;

3. The petitioner will regularly remain present before the trial Court on the date fixed by it and shall not abscond in future.

7. In view of the order passed in the main petition, the stay application also stands disposed of.

[Citation 2011(2) RLW 1278 (Raj.)]

(Rajasthan High Court)

Jaipur Bench

Pooni Vs. Phool Singh & Ors. (Bhagwati, J.)

HON'BLE MAHESH BHAGWATI, J.

Pooni

Versus

Phool Singh & Ors.

S.B. Civil Misc. Petition No. 952 of 2001, decided on 12.11.2009

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Secs. 4(3), 7(2), 10(3), 149(2) & 173 — Injury matter — Fracture of right hand in accident — Compensation claim — Tribunal awarded Rs. 22,857/- absolving insurance company from its liability — Finding of tribunal that driver of offending vehicle was having a learner's licence at the time of accident, hence insurer is not liable — Tribunal did not award anything for loss of income — Appeal for grant of reasonable compensation amount — Held — Finding of tribunal in regard to learner licence is contrary to law, therefore, set aside — Insurance company is liable to pay compensation — Claimant is entitled to receive general damages for pain and suffering of non-grievous injuries as per second schedule of M.V. Act — Loss of income not taken into consideration by tribunal therefore, Rs. 5,000/- awarded for loss of income and Rs. 1,000/- for non-grievous injury — Rs. 6,000/- additionally awarded to claimant — Claimant is entitled to get Rs. 28,857/- instead of Rs. 22,857/- from all respondents jointly and severally — Award modified to above extent.

Appeal allowed. (Paras 7, 8, 10 & 11)

eksVj ;ku vf/kfu;e] 1988] /kkjk 4¼3½] 7¼2½] 10¼3½] 149¼2½ ,oa 173 & pksfVy ekeyk & nq?kZVuk esa nka;s gkFk dk vfLFk Hkax & izfrdj nkok & vf/kdj.k us chek daiuh dks mlds nkf;Ro ls eqDr djrs gq, 22]857@- #i;s vf/kfuf.kZr fd;s & vf/kdj.k dk fu"d"kZ fd