ANIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PALOK Basil, J. Anil Kumar Ashish Kumar are named as accused in a first information report giving rise to case crime No. 110 of 1991 under Section 307, I. P. C. , P. S. Saurikh, district Farrukhabad. It appears that they made an application for bail before the Magistrate, Chhibramau who has passed a curious order which is quoted below as it is written in Annexure II: "heard and seen the remand papers. I have also seen the report of the A. P. O. Remand of accused is granted for offence punishable under Section 324, I. P. C. This offence is bailable. Let accused be released on bail on executing personal bond for Rs. 4,000 with two sureties in like amounts to each accused. Sd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-5-1991. "

(2.) SRI Dilip Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants has argued in support of this application under Section 482, Cr. P. C. that a direction be issued to the court below to accept the applicants' bonds relating to Sec tion 307, I. P. C. without compelling them to surrender and seeding to jail. In support of the said argument reliance has been placed on the case of Indrapal Singh v. State, 1988 ACC 565: 1988 JIC 165. In the cited case an offence was initially registered about a lesser offence and it was converted by the Investigat ing Officer into a graver offence. Thus the applicability of the aforesaid autho rity is out of question in the present case.

(3.) IN view of the aforesaid discussion this application is dismissed. Let the file and this order be placed before the Hon'ble Administrative Judge con cerned within three days. Application dismissed. .