Back
PATNA HIGH COURT
S.K.Das and Narayan JJ.
Sagri Bhagat
Versus
State Of Bihar
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 629 of 1950 ; 642 of 1950 ;
Decided On : DECEMBER 14, 1950
BAIL - ESSENTIAL SUPPLIES (TEMPORARY POWERS) ACT - SECTION 7 - INTERPRETATION - COURT'S DISCRETION - PRINCIPLES GOVERNING GRANT OF BAIL - SECTION 497 AND 498, CR. P. C. - SCOPE AND APPLICABILITY - SECTION 13A, ESSENTIAL SUPPLIES (TEMPORARY POWERS) AMENDMENT ACT, 1950 - APPLICABILITY.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners were charged with offences under Section 7 of the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act for possessing excess stock of foodgrains and cloth. The Magistrates and Sessions Judges refused to grant them bail. They filed applications for bail before the High Court.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court held that the offences charged were non-bailable and the grant of bail was governed by Section 497, Cr. P. C. for the initial appearance before the Court or officer, and Section 498, Cr. P. C. for the High Court or Court of Session. The Court observed that the discretion to grant bail under Section 497 had to be exercised judicially and according to established principles, considering factors such as the nature of the accusation, severity of punishment, danger of absconding, character of the accused, danger of continuing the offence, danger of tampering with witnesses, and opportunity for the accused to prepare their defense. The Court further held that Section 13A of the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Amendment Act, 1950, which imposed stringent conditions for grant of bail in certain cases, was not applicable to the present cases.
Issues: 1. Whether the offences charged were bailable or non-bailable? 2. Whether the discretion to grant bail under Section 497, Cr. P. C. was absolute or subject to certain principles? 3. Whether Section 13A of the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Amendment Act, 1950 was applicable to the present cases?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the offences charged were non-bailable and the grant of bail was governed by Section 497, Cr. P. C. for the initial appearance before the Court or officer, and Section 498, Cr. P. C. for the High Court or Court of Session. 2. The Court held that the discretion to grant bail under Section 497 had to be exercised judicially and according to established principles, considering factors such as the nature of the accusation, severity of punishment, danger of absconding, character of the accused, danger of continuing the offence, danger of tampering with witnesses, and opportunity for the accused to prepare their defense. 3. The Court held that Section 13A of the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Amendment Act, 1950, which imposed stringent conditions for grant of bail in certain cases, was not applicable to the present cases.
Final Decision: The High Court allowed the applications for bail and directed the release of the petitioners on bail to the satisfaction of the District Magistrate.
Narayan, J.
1. These are applns. for bail by certain persona who are being prosecuted under Section 7, Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act. The appln. which has been registered as Cr. Misc. No. 629 of 1950 has been filed by one Sagri Bhagat, son of Baldeo Bhagat, & by Sagri Bhagats son Nathuni Bhagat. The other appln. is by three persons, named Ramsunder Panjiar, Dhanukdhari Ram & Ramprit Singh. Both the cases had been placed before my Lord the Chief Justice sitting singly & in Cr. Misc. No. 629 his Lordship passed the following order on 15-11-1950 :
"This appln. will be heard. Issue notice returnable within ten days. The question whether this matter will be referred to a Division Bench will be considered later on."
By virtue of an order passed in Cr. Misc. No. 642 of 1950 on 23-11-1950 both the applns. were ordered to be put up before a Division Bench for hearing, & the order of his Lordship the Chief Justice dated 23-11-1950 runs as follows:
"This appln. will be heard. Issue notice returnable within seven days. Let this appln. be put up for hearing with Cr. Misc. 629 of 1950 before a Division Bench."
It has been stated by Mr. Baldeo Sahay, who appeared for the petnrs., that the reason for placing these applns. before a Division Bench is to get an authoritative decision on the question whether bail can or should be granted in such cases.
2. On 7-12-1950 we directed that the petnr. Sagri Bhagat of Case No. 629 & all the petnrs. of the other case be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Dist. Mag., & we have now to give detailed reasons for the order which we have passed. The question of bail does not arise so far as Nathuni Bhagat, the appct. 2 of case NO. 629, is concerned inasmuch as this appct. has since been detained by reason of a detention order passed under the Preventive Detention Act, 1950.
3. Regarding the petnr. 1, Sagri Bhagat of case No. 629 it is alleged that he is aged more than 70 years & on account of age & infirmity, is incapable of doing any business. This petnr. is being prosecuted on the ground that when his house, shop & godown were searched 552 1/2 pairs of saris & dhoties were found, though, according to the Stock Register the stock should have been only 551 pairs. The other allegation against this petnr. is that he had kept a certain quantity of cloth concealed in a bhuskar. The alleged difference in the account is quite negligible, & the only allegation against this petnr. which has to be considered seriously is whether he had kept some cloth concealed in a bhuskar. The petner.s answer to this allegation is that the bhuskar in which the cloth was found belong to one Mulchand Sah.
4. The petnrs. in the other case are dealers in grains, & when their shop or godown was searched 106 bags of rice & 77 bags of gram were found, though, according to the stock register, there should have been a balance of 15 bags of rice & 41 bags of gram. Their explanation was that some time before the search 91 bags of rice had been received from certain other traders & that they had been brought in a country boat which was unloaded at a ghat known at Jehanabad Ghat. From the ghat 10 bullocks carts are said to have brought these bags, & it is said that the names of the cart-men are recorded in Gari Bhara Bahi which has been seized by the Govt. With regard to the bags of gram which were found in excess, the explanation was that they had been received on the day of the search from one Rameshwar Chaudhury on the understanding that they would be kept with the petnrs. temporarily & would be later despatched to Jaintpore Mela. These are the short facts of the two cases, & bail was refused not only by the Mags. before whom the oases against these petnrs. are pending but also by the Ses. Judges.
5. There can be no doubt that the offences for which the appcts. have been charged are not bailable. The sentence provided for the offences charged is imprisonment for three years, & according to Sch. II, Cr. P. C. such o
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
