Mala Sinha vs State Of Jharkhand And Anr. on 27 September, 2002

Jharkhand High Court
Mala Sinha vs State Of Jharkhand And Anr. on 27 September, 2002
Author: D Prasad
Bench: D Prasad


ORDER

D.N. Prasad, J.

1. Heard Mr. Shailesh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M.M. Banerjee, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 and also heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as “the Code”) for expunging the condition imposed in the order dated 15.6.2002 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in connection with Jorapokhar P.S. Case No. 110 of 2002 arising out of Complaint Case No. 546 of 2002 corresponding to G.R. No. 1150 of 2002 registered under Sections 498-A, 341, 323, 379, 463, 469, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code in which the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad while granting bail to the petitioner imposed the following conditions :–

“If she finds any connection with the husband of the informant then this bail order will automatically be cancelled.

The Investigating Officer of this case is hereby directed to watch the conduct of this accused-petitioner and if he finds the accused-petitioner with the husband of the informant either in his house or any where, he will arrest this accused-petitioner and then produce her in Court”.

3. Mr. Shailesh, learned counsel for the, petitioner submitted that the learned Magistrate committed error in imposing the condition arbitrarily as against the petitioner who is a lady and that condition be sustained in law as the Investigating Officer of the case has been given ample power to arrest her without any basis and that condition should be quashed.

4. On the other hand, Mr. M.M. Banerjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party No. 2 contended before me that actually the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate granted the petitioner on bail putting those condition only on the basis of the bond of undertaking already given by the petitioner (Mala Sinha) stating therein that she shall have no connection with the accused R.K Manjhi nor she will live in her quarter, failing which, she will be liable for punishment. According to learned counsel, likewise accused No. 1 also gave a bond of undertaking claiming that he shall have no connection with the petitioner Mala Sinha and Mala Sinha will not live in his quarter/bungalow, failing which, he shall be liable for penal action under the law.

5. It is apparent that while granting bail, the Magistrate is empowered to put condition(s) if the thinks fit in the interest of justice. In this regard it appears to me that the condition imposed to the petitioner in this case taking into account the bond of undertaking of the petitioner for cancellation of bail is right and reasonable which does not require to be interfered with as the court below has rightly put the condition in terms of the undertaking that if the petitioner finds any connection with the husband of the informant, then the bail order will automatically be cancelled, But so for the condition imposed as regards the other portion of the order by which the Investigating Officer was given power/ direction to watch the conduct of the accused-petitioner Mala Sinha and if the I.O. finds the accused-petitioner with the husband of the informant, either in his house or any where, he will arrest this accused-petitioner and then produce her in court, does not appear to be proper and reasonable. Condition, if imposed, should not be extraneous and it can be imposed only for the purpose of ensuring proper and fair investigation/trial of the case. In such situation, last portion of condition about direction to the Investigating Officer is fit to be quashed.

6. Thus the order dated 15.6.2002 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad whereby the learned Magistrate imposed the condition that “The I.O. of this case is hereby directed to watch the conduct of this accused-petitioner and if he finds the accused-petitioner with the husband of the informant either in his house or anywhere, he will arrest this accused-petitioner and then produce her in court” is hereby quashed.

7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this application is disposed off.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *