MOHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. K. Verma, J. Through the impugned order dated 14-5-1992 learned Sessions Judge, Aligarh granted bail to opposite party No. 2 in case crime No. 35-A of 1991 under Sections 436/302, I. P. C. Police Station Gandhi Park, Aligarh. The present application has been moved for cancellation of that order on the ground that although the bail application of the opposite party No. 2 was rejected by the High Court, the Sessions Judge granted the bail to the opposite party No. 2 on frivolous grounds although he has no jurisdiction to entertain the application or to pass the impugned order.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record carefully. It is true that the application of the opposite party No. 2 had been rejected by the High Court and the second bail applica tion moved by the opposite party No. 2 before the Sessions Judge was rejected by the Sessions Judge vide order dated 11-9-1991 which had been moved on the ground of illness of the wife of opposite party No. 2. Thereafter, a third bail application was moved before the Sessions Judge on the ground that there had been considerable delay in the trial because the case had not yet been com mitted. On this ground the Sessions Judge granted bail vide the impugned order.

(3.) IN the present case the learned Sessions Judge did not consider the bail application of opposite party No. 2 on merits but considered the same on the ground of delay in trial and the delay in committal proceedings. The Sessions Judge had rejected bail application on merit on 29-3-1991. Thereafter, the bail application of the opposite party No. 2 had been rejected by the High Court and thereafter the second bail application of the opposite party No. 2 was again rejected by the Sessions Judge vide order dated 11-9-1991. However, when a third bail application was moved in May, 1992 on the ground that the first information report was lodged on 4-2-1991 and the charge sheet was submitted on 26-2-1991 but the case has not yet been committed even after 14 months, the Sessions Judge granted the bail. This is certainly a new ground and it has been taken after lapse of considerably long time of the rejection of the bail by the High Court.