LOKENDRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) R. B. Mehrotra, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

(2.) BY means of present Habeas Corpus petition the petitioner has prayed this court, to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Habeas Corpus, for setting the petitioner at liberty. The main ground of attack is that the petitioner was committed to sessions trial by the Magistrate vide his order dated 22- 12-1993 directing that the accused are committed to the court of Sessions and the file of the case may be transmitted to the Court of Sessions Judge within a week. According to the petitioner, the Magistrate thereafter passed an order that the accused are remanded to jail custody during and until conclusion of the Sessions trial. The exact words used by the Magis trate are quoted herein below :

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner cited another decision reported in AIR 1971 SC 186 - A. Lakshmanrao v. Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Parvatipuram and others, where the court construing provision of Section 344, Cr PC (old) made certain observations which are not relevant in the present context.