Nahar Singh v. The State Of Rajasthan(59)

Factual and Procedural Background

The opinion was delivered by K.D. Sharma, C.J., after hearing Mr. P.K. Sharma, counsel for the petitioner Nahar Singh, and Mr. S.B. Mathur, Public Prosecutor for the State, and perusal of the relevant papers. This is the fourth application for anticipatory bail filed by Nahar Singh in this Court; his three prior applications were dismissed by three different Judges of the Court. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail on medical grounds, producing a medical certificate stating he suffers from hypertension and chest pain and has been admitted to the Medical Wards, General Hospital, Bharatpur since 30.10.82. The Public Prosecutor opposed the application primarily because the petitioner had three previous rejections and had not surrendered before the learned Magistrate. The court considered that all other co-accused had been released on bail.

Legal Issues Presented

1. Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under section 438 Cr.P.C. on the medical grounds asserted.
2. Whether the petitioner's prior unsuccessful applications and failure to surrender before the Magistrate preclude grant of anticipatory bail.

Arguments of the Parties

Petitioner's Arguments

• Counsel for the petitioner prayed for anticipatory bail on medical grounds and produced a medical certificate showing hypertension and chest pain and hospital admission since 30.10.82.

Respondent's Arguments

• The Public Prosecutor contested the application mainly on the ground that the petitioner had three previous applications for anticipatory bail rejected by this Court and that the petitioner did not surrender in the court of the learned Magistrate.

Table of Precedents Cited

No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court considered the papers, the medical certificate indicating the petitioner suffers from hypertension and chest pains and has been hospitalised since 30.10.82, the fact that all other co-accused had been released on bail, and the Public Prosecutor's objections regarding prior rejected applications and non-surrender. Balancing these facts and circumstances, and in view of the petitioner's medical condition and the release of co-accused on bail, the court concluded it was proper to grant anticipatory bail under section 438 Cr.P.C., subject to specified bond, sureties and conditions to ensure the petitioner’s availability for proceedings and interrogation and to prevent interference with witnesses or departure from India without leave of the court.

Holding and Implications

HOLDING: The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner under section 438 Cr.P.C.

Directives and conditions imposed by the court:

• The petitioner shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 6,000 and two sureties of Rs. 3,000 each to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, Weir, for his appearance on each date of hearing and whenever called upon.
• Condition (i): The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by police as and when required.
• Condition (ii): The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly induce, threaten or promise any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade disclosure to the court or police.
• Condition (iii): The petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

Implications: The direct effect is that the petitioner may be released on the terms stated if he complies with the bond, sureties and conditions. The opinion does not discuss any broader precedent or wider legal implications.