RAHMAT JAHAN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter was heard yesterday in presence of Sri V.K. Chaturvedi for the applicant, Sri Tej Pal for the respondent/compLalnant, and Sri Surendra Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

(2.) Through this application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. the applicant has made a prayer for taking her in judicial custody in case Crime No.185 of 1997 corresponding to case No. 1405 of 1997 relating to P.S. Loha Mandi, District Agra, for offences under Sections 498-A/304-B/201,I.P.C.

(3.) The applicant, who is a woman, is said to be confined in S.N. Hospital at Agra at present. She had made a prayer before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra, on 29.8.1998 making a prayer for taking her into judicial custody in terms of an order of the Supreme Court dated 27.8.1998. The applicant indicated that being a heart patient and suffering from a heart attack she had admitted herself in S.N. Hospital on 21.8.1998 and was unable to move about due to her physical conditions and as such her being in the hospital and her filing the surrender application be accepted as her surrender in judicial custody. The C.J.M., Agra, by his order dated 29.8.1998 observed that it was not a surrender at all and there was no prayer for deputation of a Magistrate. Accordingly, the C.J.M. observed that it was open for the applicant to appear in person before the court and then make a surrender, otherwise the surrender application could not be considered. The Supreme Court was approached in a Special Leave petition by the compLalnant, Mohd. Isahaq, in which the accused persons including the present applicant were arrayed as respondents. The Apex Court directed that before considering the facts and circumstances of the case the accused-respondents were to surrender before the court concerned within four and file proof of such surrender within two weeks thereafter. This order was passed by the Supreme Court on 27.7.1998 in S.L.P.(Crl) No. 1764 of 1998. Subsequently, the Supreme Court was informed on 3.9.1998 that one of the accused, viz. Smt. Rahmat Jahan (the present applicant) could not surrender due to her hospitalisation. The Supreme Court was also informed that a prayer was made on her behalf for treating her admission in the hospital as a surrender in court and that the court had rejected such prayer. The Supreme Court observed