GHOOREY SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application Ghurey Singh, who is accused of committing of offences punishable under sections 302, 307, 452, 325, 147, 148, 149 and 436 I.P.C. prays that he may be directed to be enlarged on bail, during the pendency of his trial in the court below. The applicant along with his co-accused Hukma had, on an earlier occasion also, applied for similar relief by means of Criminal Misc, Bail Application no. 4074 of 1984, but the prayer made by him was refused by this Court, vide order dated 12th of September, 1984. The applicant seeks justification for moving this second application for the same relief by contending that he is doing so on fresh grounds. The Applicant was arrested on 20th of March, 1984, in connection with a case under section 302/149 I.P.C. registered at police station Goverdhan in pursuance of an F.I.R. ladged by one Lakshami Narain. A cross version of the incident was conveyed to the Police at Police station Govardhan by the applicant by means of a written first information report lodged by him on the same days and on the hasis hereof a case under sections 147/148/49 and 307 I.P.C. was registered against Laxmi Narain and others.

(2.) While the police was still investigating the case, three of the co-accused with the applicant, namely, Chhittar, Rati Ram and Sheo Ram filed Cr1. Misc. Bail Application No. 3679 of 1984, dated 25th of April, 1984 before this Court on 14th of May, 1984 and prayed that they may be directed to be released on bail. The learned Judge before whom the application came up for orders, after taking into consideration the rival versions set up by the concerned parties as also existence of injuries on both sides, made an order dated 17th of May, 1984 directing that the three accused be released on bail. Thereafter applicant Ghurey Singh along with co-accused Hukma, presented Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4074 of 1984, dated 19th of May, 1984 before this court, on 6th June, 1984 and on 7th of June, 1984, they were admitted to bail by another learned Judge of this Court.

(3.) Aggrieved, one Girdhari Lal moved the Supreme Court of India for the grant of Special Leave to appeal against the orders dated 17th of May, 1984 and 7th of June, 1984 passed by the two learned Judges of this Court. The Supreme Court, vide its order dated 4th of July, 1984 suspended the operation of both the impugned orders and directed that the applicant along with Hukam, Chhittar, Rati Ram and Sheo Ram be arrested forthwith and they be detained in jail. The applicant accordingly surrendered before the Magistrate and was taken into custody on 23rd of July, 1984. According to the applicant while the petition for Special Leave to Appeal against the orders dated 17th of May, 1984 and 7th of June, 1984 was pending, and as the police had not, after completing the investigation, submitted a chargesheet against him and the total period of his detention had exceeded 90 days, he, by means of an application, dated 2nd of August, 1984 approached the Supreme Court and prayed that he be directed to be released on bail as provided by proviso. (a) to sub-section (2) of Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.Subsequently the police actually lodged the chargesheet against the applicant in the Court of the Magistrate on 7th of August, 1984. The applicant claims that the, Supreme Court did not pass any orders on the aforesaid application filed by him, and eventually, vide its order, dated 24th of August, 1984 it granted special leave to. Girdhari Lal, to appeal against this Courts orders, dated 17th of May 1984 and 7th of June 1984 and after hearing counsel for the parties, set aside the impugned orders granting bail to the applicant and his co-accused and remanded the two bail applications back to this Court for being disposed of by any one of its Judges.