DHARMANAND ALIAS MAHATO Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the bail application moved by Dharmanand alias Mahato who has been charged u/S. 302/307 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Cantt, Lucknow I have been called upon to reconsider my decision on bail application in Criminal Misc. Case No. 3496(B) of 1992 (Amar Singh v. State) which was decided on 24-11-1992, which has now been reported in 1992 LLJ 373.

(2.) Brief facts relating to the present application for bail are that one Kallu lodged a first information report on 8-9-1992 against the applicant at Police Station Cannt, Lucknow on the basis of which a case crime No. 281 of 1992 under S. 302/307 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against him. Along with him two other persons were also shown as accused in the case. The applicant was, thereafter, arrested.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant and the learned counsel for the State have been heard. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that in the present case a charge-sheet has been filed in the court after the expiry of 90 days from the detention of the applicant. The applicant, as a matter of fact, surrendered in the court on 9-9-1992 and the charge-sheet was submitted on 10-12-1992 i.e., beyond the period of 90 days which has been prescribed under S.167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. According to the learned counsel the applicant should have been released or bail for not filing the charge-sheet within period of 90 days in the present case.