GORE LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Certain persons were tried before the Sessions Judge of Mirzapur for offences under Sections 307, 324 and 148, I. P. C. found guilty and sentenced to imprisonment. They appealed to this Court and were released on bail for the pendency of the appeal. The appeal came up for hearing before me. Dismissing it I maintained their conviction and sentences and ordered them to surrender forthwith. After duly surrendering they applied under Article 134 (1) (c) of the Constitution for the grant of a certificate of fitness to appeal to the Supreme Court. The required certificate was granted by me. They now pray for bail for the pendency of their appeal before the Supreme Court.

(2.) The case raises the question; does the High Court possess the power to grant bail to a convict, or suspend the execution of his sentence, after it has granted him a certificate of fitness under Article 134 (1) (c), or indeed under Article 132 (1). The question is of considerable importance inasmuch as it and allied questions constantly arise before the High Courts; it is a controversial question inasmuch as the views of Individual Hon'ble Judges on it are not uniform Having regard to the importance of the matter I have heard Mr. S.N. Mulla for the applicants and Mr. Shri Rama for the State at considerable length.

(3.) In urging that the High Court does possess the necessary power Mr. Mulla's first line o argument is based on Chapter XXXIX and Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, whereas Mr. Shri Rama contends that these provisions have no relevance to the matter of issue and that the only section in the Code which can apply is Section 426 but it is of no avail to the applicants.