KASHINATH SHETYE Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the brother of the complainant who had lodged a complaint before the relevant Magistrate's Court with regard to the offence of theft of electricity meter and other incidental offences against respondent No.2. The Magistrate concerned directed the complaint to be investigated under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code. A charge-sheet came to be filed on 26/11/2010. Respondent No.2 applied for bail. The learned Magistrate granted bail. The petitioner, who is the brother of the original complainant who has since expired, applied for cancellation of bail before the concerned Sessions Judge. However, the learned Sessions Judge did not cancel the bail. The impugned order gives reasons why the application for cancellation of bail was made and why it has not been allowed.

(2.) The main contention of the petitioner for cancellation of bail is that the learned Magistrate did not have power to grant bail. The bail was granted in the criminal complaint filed by the petitioner's brother himself. Before the learned Magistrate's Court, the application for cancellation of bail was not made on the ground of misuse of privilege of bail, but it was made on the ground of lack of Court's jurisdiction to grant bail.

(3.) The petitioner has relied upon the provisions contained in Sections 153 to 155 of the Electricity Act, 2003, under which Special Courts may be constituted for trying the offences under the Electricity Act. Under Section 153(1), the State Government may, by notification, constitute Special Courts. The State Government is not bound to constitute such Special Courts. That would depend upon the exigency and fact situation in a particular State.