SULAKHAN SINGHAYA Vs. KULDEEP KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by the order of learned Addl. Sessions Judge granting anticipatory bail to respondent Smt.Kuldeep Kaur on 25.2.92 who was charged for the offences under Sections 304-B/498-A/34 Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the first anticipatory bail application was dismissed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge on 5.12.91. By that order regular bail application of other accused was dismissed and present respondent's anticipatory bail was also dismissed. Therefore, the respondent filed another application before the Sessions Court on 19.2.92, through another lawyer another anticipatory bail application was moved before the Sessions Judge on 21.2.92. On being pointed out by the learned Sessions Judge that why two applications were moved, application dated 21.2.92 was withdrawn and on the application dated 21.2.92 anticipatory bail was granted to the respondent on 25.2.92.

(3.) In the support of his contention the learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that there is a difference in the language of Sections 438 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code). Learned counsel has urged that as far as Sec.439 of the Code is concerned there cannot be any limit which can be read into the language of Sec.439 of the Code for the accused person for moving applications for obtaining bail and the court.may grant bail in view of the changed circumstances or subsequent happenings which may be material on the basis of which the court could be persuaded that it is in the interest of justice that the person may be granted bail. However, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that no such interpretation could be given to the language of Sec.438 of the Code. In support of his arguments he has cited EKKARI GHOSH @ JITENDRA vs. STATE IV (1994) CCR 2655, Kalidas Mitra Vs. The State 1989 (3) Crimes 652, MALLA RAMA RAO & ANOTHER vs. STATE I (1992) CCR 745 and 1993 (2) ccc 149.