MUKTESWAR SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 498 Cr. P. C. for releasing the petitioner on bail. It is conceded by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is not in custody, that he has not been arrested so far and that a warrant for his arrest has been issued some time back by the police, but to this day the petitioner could not be apprehended. It is therefore clear that the petitioner is not in custody and that therefore there is no question in law of releasing him on bail either under Section 497 or 498 Cr.P.C. Section 497 clearly contemplates that when any person accused of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a Police Station, or appears is or is brought before a Court, he may be released on bail, but he shall not be so released if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that he has been guilty of an offence punishable with deal or imprisonment for life.

(2.) It is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the case of Muzafaruddin v. State of Hyderabad, AIR 1953 Hyd. 219 which was followed in the case of Sunder Singh v. State of Hyderabad, AIR 1954 Hyd. 55 laid down that a person who makes an application to a Court through a Counsel could be deemed to have appeared before that Court, and that this applied to this instant case. The following passage in the Judgment of Jaganmohan Reddy J. of the Hyderabad High Court is relied on:

(3.) As pointed out by the Supreme Court, no case can be accepted as a precedent on facts, as the facts of each case differ from the facts of any other. So far as the application under Section 497 Cr.P.C goes, the conditions required to be fulfilled are that the petitioner applying for bail under that Section.