RAM CHANDRA SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel. The petitioner has challenged the order of his dismissal from service dated 17.4.1997 Annexure 7 to the petition. The petitioner was Addl. District and Sessions Judge and was placed under suspention by order dated 29.11.1995 and after enquiry he was dismissed from service. The charges against the petitioner were that after the High Court rejected bail in two cases the petitioner as A.D.G. granted bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that so far as the first charge is concerned the High Court rejected the bail as not pressed. In fact in this case earlier the District and Session Judge, Sri N.S. Gahlot had rejected the bail on merits and thereafter the bail application had been moved before the High Court and this application was dismissed as not pressed. As, regards charge no. 2 the bail application had been rejected by the High Court on merits after it had earlier been rejected by the District and Sessions Judge. Thereafter the petitioner as Addl. District and Sessions Judge granted bail.

(2.) In our opinion, once the High Court rejects bail the subordinate court has no business to grant bail. It is gross indiscipline and the entire judicial system will be subverted if this is done. All the judicial officers of the subordinate judiciary should realise that the High Court is superior to the subordinate judiciary. Once the High Court has rejected bail no District and Sessions Judge or Addl. District Sessions Judge can grant bail. Thus the petitioner as (Addl. District and Sessions Judge has committed gross insubordination by granting bail once the bail had been rejected by the High Court.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed before us a judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court in Mohan Lal Vs. State of U.P. and others 1995 J.I.C. 105 Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.2087 of 1993 decided on 14.11.1994 where the learned Single Judge Hon'ble S.K. Verma, J. has held that after the High Court rejects bail on merits the Sessions Judge can entertain the bail application and can grant it. We do not at all agree with this view. Such a view will be totally subversive of judicial discipline. After the High Court rejects bail on merits the Sessions Judge cannot grant bail. Hence we over-rule the view of Hon'ble S.K. Verma, J.