RANVEER SINGH Vs. DESH RAJ SINGH CHAUHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants figure as accused persons in Case Crime No. 256 of 1982, under sections 302 and 307, Indian Penal Code of District Mainpuri. They, however chose to surrender before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah, instead of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mainpuri, on 5th November, 1962. They were remanded to Jail custody and on application for bail was moved before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah, who did not entertain it. The bail application then moved in the Sessions Court, Etah, was transferred to II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Etah, namely, Sri M.P. Singh. The II Additional District and. Sessions Judge, Etah, vide its order dated 17-11-1982 granted bail to the applicants. It would appear that an application was also moved before the Additional Munsif Magistrate, Mainpuri, for bail. He rejected that application observing that neither the applicants have put in appearance before him, nor are they in the Custody of the court, hence the application is rejected. Subsequently the complainant of the case moved an application before the Sessions Judge, Mainpuri, for cancellation of the bail granted by Etah court, which had application issued notice to the present applicants and sent for reports from the police. It also directed that all the relevant papers may be obtained from the Etah Court. The applicants maintained that the entire proceedings on the aforesaid application, namely, Criminal Misc. Application No. 1028 of 1982, pending before the court of Sessions Judge, Mainpuri, is without jurisdiction and has prayed that the proceedings may be quashed This prayer has been opposed by the opposite party by putting appearance.

(2.) It has been maintained in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite party No.1 that the Additional Munsif Magistrate, Manipuri rightly rejected the application of the applicants, as he had no papers regarding the case. It was, further main rained that the case relates to District Mainpuri, consequently, Etah court had no jurisdiction to entertain any bail application. It was further, maintained that this was also brought to the notice of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Etah, that he has no jurisdiction in the matter, but he still granted bail. It was, further, maintained that the notices of the application for cancellation of bail were served upon the applicants and they appeared before the court of Sessions Judge, Mainpuri, where the application was heard and was pending orders and the accused persons have purposely avoided the courts at Mainpuri.

(3.) The case was for admission, but, as the points involved have a far reaching bearing of greatest importance and the opposite side has also put in apprehended, and points involved are purely legal after hearing some arguments, declared to hear the matter at length, so that a proper adjudication may be made when the points involved are only law points.