SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(Pat) 205

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
ANJANA PRAKASH, J.
Ramdev Sahani
Ramesh Kumar @ Chhotka Makhan
Rahul Kumar Yadav
Sanjay Kumar - Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar - Opposite Party/s
Criminal Miscellaneous No.48853, 48779, 48965, 48795 of 2012
Decided On : 12th February, 2014

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
(In Cr.Misc. No.48853 of 2012)
For the Petitioner/s:Mr. Rajendra Prasad Sah, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Renuka Ratnakar, A.P.P.
(In Cr.Misc. No.48779 of 2012)
For the Petitioner/s:Mr. Ghanshyam Tiwary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. U.N. Mishra, A.P.P. (In Cr.Misc. No.48965 of 2012)
For the Petitioner/s:Mr. Rakesh Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, A.P.P.
(In Cr.Misc. No.48795 of 2012)
For the Petitioner/s:Mr. Ansul, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, A.P.P.

Headnote:Code of Criminal Procedure, 1974-Sections 437, 439, 441, 441A-Release on bail on conditions-the words of Section 439(1) (a), "for the purposes mentioned in that sub-section" also required corresponding amendment to tune in with Section 437(3)-that having not been done it has somewhat created an impression that only Magistrates are required to impose conditions-Keeping in mind the reasons for amendments of 2005, it would be desirable that High Courts and Sessions Judge interpret the word ’may’ appearing in Section 439(1) (a) as shall’ and necessarily impose conditions since ’purpose’ has been substituted with a mandate, so as to reach a harmonious construction-by ignoring the importance of imposition of conditions, the Courts have not only failed to keep pace with the march of the law, but have also permitted an accused to continue to assume that he has relinquished his responsibility of a trial once released on bail-as per the New Code the Courts have to keep in mind that; (i) the sufficiency of the bond is an indeterminate factor (441) (ii) Both, the bailor, as well as the accused are bound to ensure attendance/production of the bailed accused before the Court on the required dates (473 (3) (a) read with 441(1) Form 45) (iii) Attendance on the date of charge is a prefixed condition (437 (3) (a) read in consonance with 441 Form 45) (iv) The Court is competent to accept Affidavits in proof of sufficiency of Bailors [441 (4)] (v) a bailor has to furnish further details (441 A)-Conditions imposed in the present cases explained-guidelines to Criminal Courts given. (Paras 41, 42, 47 to 53)

       (1976)2 SCC 521, AIR (38) 1951 Madras 1042 para 3; (1978)4 SCC 47, AIR 1927 Pat 302, AIR 1931 Alld. 356, AIR 1933 Sind 367, AIR 1979 SC 1360-Referred.

ORAL ORDER

1. The following Petitioners were granted Bail by this Court considering the merits of the case on the conditions enumerated and reasoned order was to follow later. Petitioner Ramdev Sahani of Cr.Misc.No.48853 of 2012 was granted bail by order dated 17.12.2012 to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katihar in connection with Korha P.S. case No.306 of 2012 on conditions A, B, C, D, E, whereas Petitioner Ramesh Kumar @ Chhotka Makhan of Cr.Misc.No.48779 of 2012 was granted bail to the satisfaction of A.C.J.M., Danapur in connection with Danapur P.S. case No.254 of 2012 on conditions A, C, D, E, G, Petitioner Rahul Kumar Yadav of Cr.Misc.No.48965 of 2012 was granted bail by order dated 18.12.2012 to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Saharsa in connection with Sonbarsa Raj P.S. case No.128 of 2012 on conditions A, C, D, E, I and Petitioner Sanjay Kumar of Cr.Misc.No.48795 of 2012 was granted bail to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad in connection with Makhdumpur P.S. case No.219 of 2011 on conditions A, H.

Conditions are enumerated below:

(A) That one of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner, who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioner. The bailor will undertake to furnish information to the court about any change in the address of the petitioner.

(B) That the affidavit shall clearly state that the petitioner is not an accused in any other case and, if he is, he shall not be released on bail.

(C) That the bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the petitioner is implicated in any other case of similar nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail on the ground of misuse.

(D) That the petitioner will give an undertaking that he will receive the police papers on the given date and be present on date fixed for charge and if he fails to do so on two given dates and delays the trial in any manner, his bail will be liable to be cancelled for reasons of misuse.

(E) That the petitioner will be well represented on each date and if he fails to do so on two consecutive dates, his bail will be liable to be cancelled.

(G) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has been implicated repeatedly at the instance of the local police who is hostile to the petitioner and seeks protection of a person well reputed doing social service in the area. Under the circumstances, the petitioner will report to Mr. Kishore Kunal, Chairman, Bihar Religious Trust Board, Bihar, Patna, within fifteen days of his release on provisional bail for a period of six months and file a certificate about the same in the court within the stipulated time. In case, the petitioner fails to file certificate, notice shall be sent to him for cancellation of bail, (ii) That once the petitioner reports to Mr. Kunal, Mr. Kunal is requested to evolve a method by which without affecting the petitioner’s present vocation, if any, the petitioner can be made socially productive so that an effort is made to bring him back in the main stream of the society/ he is given adequate protection and (iii) At the end of the six months, the petitioner will be required to file a certificate in the court below granted by Mr. Kishore Kunal. If the certificate granted to the petitioner is found satisfactory, the court below will confirm the provisional bail granted to the petitioner or else will issue notice for cancellation of bail.

(H) The petitioner volunteers to deposit Rs.500/- (five hundred) per month in the court below firstly within 15 days of the release from jail custody and subsequently by 15th every month which the wife of the petitioner will be at liberty to withdraw without prejudice the right of the parties. The court below shall inform the wife of the petitioner about the present order. However, if the Complainant/Informant has a Bank Account o





























































































































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top