MAHESH BADRIPRASAD Vs. MIRUKHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition filed under sections 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the applicant Mahesh Badriprasad Sharma and is directed against the bail order dated 28.4.1988 passed by the Second Additional Judge to the Court of the Sessions Judge, Dewas in Bail Application No. 194 of 1988 arising out of Crime No. 67/88 of Police Station Hat Pipliya, District Dewas, whereby the non-applicant accused Mirukhan (Mir Afzal Khan) Sb. Mehmood Khan has been released on his furnishing a bail for Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties for Rs. 10,000/- each.

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted at the out-set that in the light of the Supreme Court decision in Usmanbhai v. State of Gujarat it has become doubtful whether a revision would lie against the order granting bail, like the impugned order, in view of the observations made therein to the effect that grant or refusal of bail application is essentially an interlocutory order and no finality is attached to an order of a Court granting or refusing bail. He, therefore, prays for treating this petition as one under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, this petition is entertained under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and it be registered as M. Cr. C.

(3.) The main grievance of the applicant is that even though he was an eye-witness to the incident in which the accused Wilson was attacked and killed by the accused-persons, who had come armed with weapons and he had made a written complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Dewas, in that behalf, alleging that the deceased Wilson was not only murdered, but was robbed of a sum of Rs. 50,000/- carried by him in an attached at the time of the incident for the purpose of bidding at the auction which was to take place on 22.3.1988 in respect of Hatpipliya Naka, no investigation was made by the Police in respect of the serious allegations of dacoity and even the applicant was not interrogated about it nor included as an eye-witness in the case. The applicants complaint to the Superintendent of Police, has been kept in the case-diary without any serious attempt having been made to investigate the offence of murder with dacoity.