KAMAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above case arises from district which is covered by the Dacoity Affected Area Act, 1986 which shall hereinafter be referred to as Act. In this case an objection has been raised by the learned A.G.A. that as 180 days have not passed after the arrest of the accused-applicant the bail cannot be considered by this High Court. In this respect my attention has been drawn to proviso to S.10 of the Act. It was also submitted that it is a Special Act and this proviso will apply and the general provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as Code) will stand excluded.

(2.) The learned counsel for the applicant urged that the provision of S.10 of the Act only puts some restrictions on the granting of bail in matters of scheduled offences mentioned in the Act. There is no complete blanket on the powers of this Court to grant bail within 180 days of the arrest of the accused persons.

(3.) Sarvasri G.P. Dixit and J.S. Sengar Advocates have intervened in the matter and urged that as the matter raises an important question they may be permitted to address this Court. Consequently the above Advocates had advanced their arguments in order to assist this Court in interpreting the provisions of S.10 of the Act.