NANHA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the third bail application moved by the petitioner for bail in case Crime No. 53 of 1989 under Section 302, I.P.C. of P.S. Ganj, district Rampur Honble N.L. Ganguli, J. has referred the following question to a larger Bench for an authoritative pronouncement: Whether an accused is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of party by moving a second or third bail application in a circumstance that at a later date a co-accused of the same criminal case with a similar role was granted bail by the another Honble Judge before whom with out disclosing the fact that the bail application of another co-accused with similar role had already been rejected, by another Bench, bail was granted.

(2.) The short facts relevant for the decision of the aforesaid question are as under:A First Information Report was lodged against Iqbal, Dildar Khan, Khursheed and Nanha at 11.10 a.m. on 9.10.1989 in the above mentioned police station. Khursheed and Dildar had moved application No. 1865 of 1991 for bail. This application was rejected by Honble V.N. Mehrotra, J. Nanha also moved first bail application which was rejected on 7.12.1991. The second application which was rejected on 7.12.1991. The second application moved by Khursheed, Dildar and Nanha were rejected. Khusheed was granted bail on the ground of age in the third attempt.

(3.) In the third bail application moved on behalf of Dildar, bail was granted by Honble V.N. Mehrotra, J. Thereafter, Iqbal Husain Khan was also granted bail by Honble B.P. Singh, J.A prayer was made that the applicant be also granted bail on the ground of parity. The Honble Single Judge referred to two judgments of this Court, namely, Shobharam v. State of U.P. and Sayed Khan v. State of U.P.2. The Honble Judge is of the view that the aforesaid two decisions are taking contrary view about parity in granting of bail and this matter should be set up at rest by a pronouncement of a larger Bench.