RAJIV ALIAS RAJU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is not the person who has caused any injury on the deceased. The petitioner even as per the case for the prosecution, is the one who is alleged to have caused an injury on Ejaz, who is the son of the deceased. She further submits, after drawing my attention to the MLC, that the nature of injuries has been indicated as simple . The counsel for the petitioner also stated that the injured Ejaz was discharged on the same day.

(2.) The learned counsel for the State opposed the grant of bail and he cited the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Gurcharan Singh & Others v. State (Delhi Administration): 1978 SCC (Cri) 41 and in particular he referred to para 24 thereof which reads as under:- 24. Section 439 (1) Cr. P.C. of the new Code, on the other hand, confers special powers on the High Court or the Court of Session in respect of bail. Unlike under Section 437 (1) there is no ban imposed under Section 439 (1), Cr.P.C. against granting of bail by the High Court or the Court of Session to persons accused of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life. It is, however, legitimate to suppose that the High Court or the Court of Session will be approached by an accused only after he has failed before the Magistrate and after the investigation has progressed throwing light on the evidence and circumstances implicating the accused. Even so, the High Court or the Court of Session will have to exercise its judicial discretion in considering the question of granting of bail under Section 439 (1), Cr. P.C. of the new Code. The over-riding considerations in granting bail to which we adverted to earlier and which are common both in the case of Section 437 (1) and Section 439 (1), Cr.P.C. of the new Code are the nature and gravity of the circumstances in which the offence is committed; the position and the status of the accused with reference to the victim and the witnesses; the likelihood, of the accused fleeing from justice; of repeating the offence; of jeopardising his own life being faced with a grim prospect of possible conviction in the case; of tampering with witnesses; the history of the case as well as of its investigation and other relevant grounds which, in view of so many valuable factors, cannot be exhaustively set out.

(3.) Upon a consideration of the aforesaid extract, it becomes clear that there is no ban imposed under Section 439 against the grant of bail by the High Court to the persons accused of offences punishable upto death or imprisonment for life. However, the considerations that have to be kept in mind while granting bail, have been indicated by the Supreme Court.