SHIV PRASAD PRAJAPAT Vs. HUKUM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA for the opposite party, although represented by his counsel is not here nor is the counsel present when the matter is called out.

(2.) The present opposite party was granted bail in Bail Application No. 5387 of 1995 by an order of this Court dated 18-5-1995. The notice of that bail application was given to the Government advocate on 8-5-1995. It is stated by the applicant now that Rule 18(3) of the Allahabad High Court Rules in Chapter XVIII bars granting of bail before 10 days have elapsed after the giving of such notice and the hearing of such application. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that the area in question was a dacoity affected area as notified. The offences were scheduled offences under the U.P. Dacoity Affected Areas Act, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and S. 10 of the Act was a bar to the grant of bail before expiry of 180 days.

(3.) So far as the second contention is concerned, I may quote S. 10 of the said Act as under :-