CHHABI Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners prayer for bail on the ground that trial has not been concluded within sixty days from the first date fixed for taking evidence, and therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail was not accepted by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Cuttack (in short, J.M.F.C.) on the ground that materials on record show about his complicity in the offences alleged. A motion before the learned Sessions Judge, Cuttack did not bring any relief, as prayer was also refused by the learned 1st AddI. Sessions Judge, Cuttack.

(2.) Mr. B. S. Mishra (1), learned counsel for petitioner submits that reasons indicated by learned J.M.F.C. show prejudging of the whole issue and requirements of sub-section (6) of section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, the Code) have not been kept in view. Learned counsel for Slate on the other hand submitted that for good reasons prayer has not been accepted.

(3.) A Magistrate while dealing with a case under subsection (6) of section 437 of the Code has to record reasons for making an exception. The said provision deals with cases where the trial of a person accused of any non-bailable offence is not concluded within a period of a sixty days from the first day fixed for taking evidence in the case, and it provides that such person shall, if he is in custody during the whole of the said period be released on bail unless for reasons to be recorded in writing the Magistrate otherwise directs. It is the right of an accused person to demand that the charge against him should be tried without any unreasonable delay and such delay entitles the accused to get bail. That right is statutorily recognised and puts a time limit. In a case falling under this sub-section if the Magistrate for reasons to be recorded, holds that the accused shall not be released, then the accused will not be released on bail. It is stated that merits of the case should not be considered at that stage. There is no force in this place. An overall view cannot be equated with prejudging the case. The Court is not precluded from considering the nature of allegations, while dealing with a. case under subsection (6) of section 437 of the Code. Taking totality of the circumstances, I find nothing wrong in the orders passed by the courts below to warrant interference. However, any observation made while dealing with the case should not weigh when the matter is taken up for trial. Learned counsel for petitioner states that in case trial is not expeditiously finalised, learned Magistrate shall be moved for bail. Needless to say that an effort should be made by learned Magistrate to dispose of the proceeding as early as practicable. If any application for bail is filed, the same shall be considered on its own merits. The Criminal Misc. case is disposed of. Send back the L. C. R. forthwith. Cri. Mise case disposed of.