RAM BABU SAKSENA Vs. REX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Sections 491 and 561A, Criminal P. C. A warrant dated 8th May 1949, was issued by Shri. V. K. B. Pillai, Regional Commissioner (who now takes the place of the Political Agent) of the United State of Rajasthan, under Section 7, Extradition Act, 1903 (XV [15] of 1903) for the arrest of the applicant, Dr. Ram Babu Saxena, and for his removal to the United State of Rajasthan to be delivered to the District Magistrate of Tonk for enquiry into certain offences against the laws of that State which he is said to have committed. The warrant was addressed to the District Magistrate of Naini Tal within whose jurisdiction the applicant resided at that time. The warrant authorised the District Magistrate of Naini Tal to release the applicant on bail if he furnished a bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000 with one surety in the like amount, The warrant was served upon the applicant at Naini Tal on 23rd May 1949 and he was, thereafter, released on bail and directed to present himself before the District Magistrate of Tonk as required by the said warrant, on 7th June 1949. The applicant presented this application to this Court on 3rd June 1949 accompanied by an affidavit alleging that the arrest of the applicant was illegal and praying that the proceedings pending before the District Magistrate of Naini Tal relating to his arrest pursuant to the said warrant be quashed and that he may be released from any obligation to surrender himself to the United State of Rajasthan. Although it is not stated in the warrant, it appears from the affidavit and other papers on the record that the offences with which the applicant has been Charged are those under 8s. 383 and 420, Penal Code. Although Section 561A, Criminal P. C. has also been mentioned in the application it is apparent that the application is one mainly under Section 491, Criminal P. C.

(2.) The question arises whether the High Court has jurisdiction under Section 491, Criminal P. C. in the case of a person who is not under detention but has been released on bail. A doubt was expressed by the Judicial Commissioner's Court at Sind in the case of Jamna v. Emperor, A.I.R. (13) 1926 Sind 126 : (27 Cr. L. J. 37) whether it was necessary for the Court to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 491, Criminal P. C. where the person detained was on bail. But the question was set at rest by the Allahabad High Court in the case of Sandal Singh v. District Magistrate, Dehra Dun, 56 ALL. 409 : (A. I. R. (21) 1934 ALL. 148 : 35 Cr. L. J. 1296) and it was held that where a person has been arrested consequent on a warrant of arrest the High Court could still interfere although he has been temporarily released on bail pending further enquiry.

(3.) The applicant is a member of the United Provinces Civil (Executive) Service of about thirty years' standing and is a resident of this province. In the year 1947 his services were placed at the disposal of the Government of India in the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting as Deputy Secretary. In January 1948, he was appointed Administrator of the Tonk State where a dispute had arisen in regard to the succession to the gaddi. On 11th February 1948 one of the claimants, Nawab Ismail Ali Khan, was recognised as Nawab and the applicant was then appointed as Dewan and vice-President of the State Council of which the Nawab was the President. Later, the Tonk State merged into the State of Rajasthan on 1st May 1948. Thereafter the applicant was appointed Chief Executive Officer under the Rajasthan Government at Tonk and ha held this office till 31st July 1948. After that he was appointed Special Officer to the Rajasthan Government at Udaipur and continued to hold that appointment upto the end of the month. After that he reverted to the United Provinces Government and was granted leave for a period of four months by that Government with effect from 1st September 1948. The leave has been further extended from time to time on medical grounds.