T V SARMA Vs. ACHUTHUNI NAGAKOTESWARARAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Miscellaneous Petition under Section 439 (2), Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, is for cancellation of the bail granted to the accused persons in P. R. C. No. 1 of 1975 on the file of the Additional Munsif Magistrate's Court, Chirala.

(2.) THE Additional Munsif Magistrate, Chirala committed the accused persons to take their trial for offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 120-B read with 302, 201 and 466 I. P. C. under an order dated 10-2-1976. All the accused persons were on bail before they were taken into custody in pursuance to the committal order. They preferred urgent applications for bail under Crl. M. P. Nos. 35 and 37 of 1976 before the Sessions Judge. Ongole on 10-2-1976 itself. On each of these two applications, the learned Sessions Judge passed the following order. P. P. is given notice. Made over to the Additional Sessions Judge, for disposal. The applications having thus been sent to the Additional Sessions Judge, the learned Additional Sessions Judge passed orders granting bail to all the accused under his order dated 10-2-1976.

(3.) SRI T. V. Sarma, the petitioner herein raised only one contention and that is in regard to the jurisdiction of the Additional Sessions Judge to pass the orders of bail in favour of the Accused. It is argued that an Additional Sessions Judge has no jurisdiction to dispose of an application for bail except when he is validly invested with such jurisdiction by the Sessions Judge under the circumstances mentioned in Section 10 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is vehemently argued that though the provision in Section 10 (3) in the Code is almost the same as the provision in Section 17 (4), of the Old Code, the Legislature has purposefully changed the word "incapacity" in the old Section 17 (4) to the word "inability" in the Section 10 (3) of the new Code and that no Sessions Judge can make over any application for bail to an Additional Sessions Judge except when he is actually absent from the court or is physically unable to dispose of the application. Another ground of attack of Sri Sarma against the validity of the order of the Sessions Judge making over the application for bail to the Additional Sessions Judge is that the Sessions Judge passed only a bald order of "made over" without mentioning the reasons for making over the bail applications. Sri Sarma contends that in so far as the order of the Sessions Judge making over the applications to the Additional Sessions Judge is illegal, the Additional Sessions Judge did not" have any valid jurisdiction to dispose of the applications. It is therefore urged that the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge granting bail should be cancelled.