[2025:RJ-JP:50857] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1709/2023 Sanjay Bhati S/o Shri Ratan Singh Bhati, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Village Chiti, Police Station Dankaur, District Gautam Budhh Nagar, U.p. (At Present Confined Central Jail Bharatpur) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP 2. Superintendent Police Officer, Central Jail Sevar, Bharatpur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajay Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP Mr. M.S. Shekhawat, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 15/12/2025 Instant Criminal Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India R/w Rule 315-H of Rajasthan High Court Rules seeking the following relief:- “It is, therefore, prayed that your Lordships may graciously be pleased to accept and allow this petition and may kindly be directed to the all concerning Lower Courts along with the Superintendent of Central Jail Sevar, Bharatpur and petitioner is behind the bar since 07.06.2019 for allowing the accused petitioner for attending the court proceedings in each and every case against him through Video Conferencing i.e., on Remand Paper/ production warrant and Judicial Custody warrant in the larger interest of justice. Any other order or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper looking to the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.” [2025:RJ-JP:50857] (2 of 3) [CRLW-1709/2023] Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been in confinement since 07.06.2019 and is presently confined in Central Jail, Bharatpur. Counsel submits that as per information gathered by the petitioner, as many as 396 cases have been registered against him within the state of Rajasthan in several different courts. Counsel submits that maximum cases are triable by Magistrate for which he can be sentenced for a maximum period of 7 years. Counsel submits that on account of pendency of a huge number of cases, the petitioner is unable to attend all the cases physically and in number of cases even summons have not been served upon him. Counsel submits that in view of the aforesaid peculiar facts, presence of petitioner may be ensured before the trial courts through VC so that trial in all cases be conducted expeditiously. Learned state counsel acknowledges the unique facts of this case and submits that appropriate order may be passed. I have considered the submissions made at bar and perused the material available at record, including the comprehensive chart of the pending cases produced by the counsel for the petitioner, in respect of the pending cases against the petitioner. The petitioner’s incarceration since 2019, coupled with the staggering pendency of 396 cases, has led to a situation where the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 is being systematically frustrated. Physical production in such a massive volume of cases is a logistical impossibility, thus leading to perpetual adjournments and an indefinite 'under-trial' status. If this persists, the process will automatically become the punishment, as the petitioner [2025:RJ-JP:50857] (3 of 3) [CRLW-1709/2023] remains in custody not due to a conviction, but due to administrative gridlock. Utilizing Video Conferencing (VC) is the only viable remedy to ensure speedy trial and to allow these trials to move towards an expeditious conclusion. Securing his presence through electronic means is therefore a constitutional necessity to prevent a total miscarriage of justice. Taking into consideration all facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it just and proper to dispose of this petition with the following directions-: 1) Petitioner shall submit a separate application seeking permission to produce him before the concerned Court through VC, for each case with complete details (i.e. case number, case title and name of the Court, where the case is pending) before the Jail Authority, where petitioner is presently confined. 2) If any such application is filed by the petitioner, Jail Authority is directed to intimate the concerned trial court about this application and if it is found that case is pending against the petitioner in that court, then petitioner shall be produced before that court through VC. 3) The concerned trial court then shall provide the VC link to the Jail Authorities at least 24 hours prior to the hearing in order to ensure consistent presence of the accused for the hearing. Accordingly, the Criminal Writ Petition stands disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also disposed of. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J Manoj Solanki /46