STATE Vs. JAGANNATH SWAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision application is directed against the order dated 8 -8 -67 passed by the S.D.O. Magistrate, First Class, Sadar, Cuttack, granting anticipatory bail to the opposite party in G. R. Case No. 1313/1699 T/67 of 1967. The State of Orissa has filed this revision application on the allegation that there was no formal warrant of arrest issued against the opposite party. As such by merely appearing before the learned Magistrate the opposite party could not obtain an order for anticipatory bail.

(2.) MR . Rahenoma, appearing for the opposite party, contends that this application has become infructuous inasmuch as the case in question has now been concluded. Mr. Ramdas, appearing for the State, however, wants me to decide the question as to whether anticipatory bail can be granted in law. There was no consensus of judicial, opinion on this point. Majority of the High Courts, however, had supported the view that there was no provision for any anticipatory bail. Reference may be made to AIR 1950 EP 53 (PB), (Amir Chand v. Crown); AIR 1954 Madh B 113 (FB), State v. Dallu Punia, AIR 1954 Raj 279, Juhar Mal v. State, AIR 1955 Calcutta 141, Amjad v. State, AIR 1959 Andh Pra 639, Public Prosecutor v. Manikya Rao, AIR 1963 Madhya Pradesh 276 State of Madhya Pradesh v. Narayan Prasad, AIR 1966 Mys 71, State of Mysore v. Baswanth Rao and AIR 1967 Ker 189, Pulinthanam v. State.