JUDGMENT :

Mahendra Kumar Goyal, J.

1. In the S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15266/2020; Bharat Lal @ Bharti vs. State of Rajasthan, this Court has, vide order dated 10.12.2020, directed the learned Public Prosecutor to procure the case diary as well as the criminal antecedents of the petitioner. On next date i.e. on 18.12.2020, learned Public Prosecutor was again granted opportunity to procure the criminal antecedents of the petitioner.

2. In S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15579/2020; Hansram vs. State of Rajasthan, this Court has, vide order dated 18.12.2020, directed the learned Public Prosecutor to procure the case diary as well as the criminal antecedents of the petitioner. Today, in pursuance of the directions issued by this Court, learned Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary as well as the status report dated 03.01.2021 which is taken on record. The status report furnished by the SHO, Police Station Sewar, district Bharatpur contains criminal antecedents of accused-petitioner Bharat Lal @ Bharti only without any information as to criminal antecedents of accused Hansram. Even the report as to criminal antecedents of accused-petitioner Bharat Lal @ Bharti is incomplete. As per the status report, the accused-petitioner Bharat Lal @ Bharti has following criminal cases registered against him:

However, as per the bail orders of accused-petitioner Bharat Lal @ Bharti, placed on record by the petitioner along with memo of the bail application, following criminal cases are also registered against him.

All these aforesaid criminal cases are not mentioned in the criminal record furnished by the learned Public Prosecutor with the Court today.

3. In so far as criminal record of accused Hansram is concerned, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he has about 12 other criminal cases of similar nature pending against him.

4. This Court comes across such instances almost daily wherein the record of the criminal antecedents of the accused-petitioners furnished by the learned Public Prosecutor is incomplete. This Court has, on earlier occasions, directed learned GA cum AAG as well as learned AAG representing the Department of Home, Government of Rajasthan to ensure that criminal antecedents of the accused persons furnished for perusal of the Court represent correct and complete picture and they have in turn instructed the authorities; but, of no avail. In this regard, reference may be made to the following com