The Rajasthan High Court recently criticized a trial court for omitting the ‘date of arrest’ in a bail rejection order [Kamal Kishore v. State Of Rajasthan]. Justice Rajendra Prashad Soni noted the “casual manner” in which the trial court handled the order, stating that it failed to mention both the date of the incident and the date of arrest, key details necessary for such rulings.
The High Court emphasized that the date of arrest is a crucial element in any bail order, and its exclusion represented a significant oversight by the presiding judge. Justice Soni remarked, “The date of arrest of the accused is an integral and crucial part of a bail order, but the Presiding Officer did not consider it appropriate to mention it. This omission is a serious lapse.”
The case involved two men charged under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act for possession of 7 grams of Smack and 7.1 kilograms of poppy-straw near Pushkar in Nagaur district. After reviewing the evidence, the High Court granted bail, finding that the recovered contraband was below the “commercial quantity” threshold required to make the offense non-bailable under the NDPS Act.
However, before concluding the order, the Court expressed its dissatisfaction with the trial court’s handling of the bail rejection, especially as the trial court was overseen by a senior officer with significant experience. The High Court stressed the importance of judicial rigor, asserting that accurately recording key dates is essential to maintain legal precision. It also raised concerns about similar oversights found in many other orders submitted for review.
Advocate Ananda Ram represented the petitioners, while Public Prosecutor Shrawan Singh appeared for the State of Rajasthan.
