Court No. - 43 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6381 of 1992 Petitioner :- Krishna Kumar Respondent :- State Petitioner Counsel :- Ali Hasan Respondent Counsel :- A.G.A. Hon'ble Ravindra Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the
record.
This application has been filed with a prayer to quash the proceedings of
complaint case no. 1303/9/1990 under Section 323, 392, 504, 506 IPC,
pending in the court of Special Judicial Magistrate, Saidpur, District-Gazipur.
From the perusal of the record it appears that in the present case after perusing
the complaint and statements under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. the learned
Magistrate concerned has taken the cognizance and summoned the applicants
Ramji and Ram Sunder for the offence under Section 392 IPC. The allegation
made in the complaint and in the statement under Sections 200 and 202
Cr.P.C. prima facie disclosing the commission of the aforesaid offence. There
is no illegality in taking the cognizance and summoning the applicant vide
order dated 17.1.1991 and there is good ground for quashing the proceeding
of the above mentioned case, therefore, such prayer is refused.
Interim order dated 28.5.1992 is hereby vacated.
However, it is directed that in case applicant appears before the concerned
concerned within 30 days from today and applies for bail the same shall be
heard and disposed of Smt. Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. 2005
Cr.L.J. 755.
The Full Bench of this court has held in the aforementioned case:
1. Even if a cognizable offence is disclosed in the FIR or complaint the
arrest of the accused is not a must, rather the police officer should be
guided by the the decision of the Supreme Court in Joginder Kumar
Vs. State of U.P. 1994 Cr.L.J. 1981, before deciding whether to make
an arrest or not.
2. The High Court should ordinarily not direct any Subordinate Court to
decide the bail application the same day, as that would be interfering
with the judicial discretion of the court hearing the bail application.
However, as stated above, when the bail application is under section
437 Cr.P.C. ordinarily the Magistrate should himself decide the bail
application the same day, and if he decides in a rare and exceptional
case not to decide it on the same day, he must record his reasons in
writing. As regards the application under section 439 Cr.P.C. it is in
the discretion of the learned Sessions Judge, considering the facts and
circumstances whether to decide the bail application the same day or
not, and it is also in his discretion to grant interim bail the same day
subject to the final decision on the bail application later.
The same has been approved by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Lal Kamlendra
Pratap Singh Versus State of U.P. on 23.3.2009 in Criminal Appeal No. 538
of 2009.
With this direction, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 19.7.2010
RPD