Order

03/03/2025 :

Instant petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by accused-petitioner praying inter-alia that the impugned order dated 09.05.2024 passed by Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No.5, Jaipur Metropolitan-II, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 70 (2) of Cr.P.C. for converting arrest warrants into bailable warrant has been rejected, be set aside.

It is pleaded in the petition that the complainant had lodged an F.I.R. No.76/2020 at Police Station Bani Park, Jaipur for offences u/s.420, 406, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B I.P.C. against petitioner & other persons. After investigation, challan had been filed. Thereafter, during trial, a compromise had been arrived at between the parties. The Co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide its order dt.12.01.2021 had granted bail to the petitioner in terms of compromise. Later-on, the bail granted to the petitioner was cancelled vide order dt.03.05.2023 upon preferring the bail cancellation application by the complainant. The ld. Trial Court had issued standing arrest warrants against the petitioner as he could not be appeared before ld. Trial Court. The petitioner filed an application u/S.70 (2) of Cr.P.C. for converting his non-bailable warrants into bailable warrants. The ld. Trial Court vide its order dt.09.05.2024 dismissed the said application without considering the factum of compromise.

Learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioner submits that the bail of the petitioner was canceled vide order dt.03.05.2023 on account of non-payment of the disputed amount mentioned in the compromise. Later-on, when the petitioner paid the complete amount to the respondent & the respondent also had no objection, if the order dt.03.05.2023 is recalled, the petitioner filed an application for recalling of the order dt.03.05.2023 but the same was came to be dismissed vide order dt.27.09.2023 in the absence of the petitioner. In the meantime, ld. Trial Court issued the arrest warrants against the petitioner as the petitioner did not appeared before ld. Trial Court on several occasions and being aggrieved of the arrest warrants the petitioner filed an application under Section 70(2) of Cr.P.C. for converting the arrest warrants into bailable warrants. The ld. Trial Court dismissed the said application of petitioner vide order dt.09.05.2024. Since the petitioner has paid the complete disputed amount and there remains no dispute between the parties, the absence of the petitioner before ld. Trial Court was also bonafide and not intentional. Therefore, the present petition may be allowed and the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court, be quashed & set aside.

On the other-hand, learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the submissions made herein-above & submitted that the bail cancellation application filed by the complainant-respondent was allowed while canceling the benefit of bail extended to the accused vide order dt.12.01.2021. It was also ordered that the petitioner shall surrender himself before the jail authorities forthwith, and in no case later than a week from today, failing which the State shall take an appropriate action to secure his custody. The petitioner has not complied with the order dt.03.05.2023 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court till today. Therefore, ld. Trial Court has rightly issued arrest warrants against the petitioner.

Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties & perused the material made available on the record.

There has been an inordinate delay in trial due to prolonged absence of the petitioner. The reason provided for such absence by petitioner in his application does not appear to be just & reasonable. Hence, in my opinion, it is not justified to convert the arrest warrants issued for the arrest of petitioner into bailable warrants.

Thus, the contentions raised by learned counsel appearing for accused-petitioner, have no force in the facts & circu