SUSHIL KUMAR DAS Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant -Petitioner made an application, in pending Criminal Appeal No. 122 of 1993 from conviction under Section 302, IPC, for suspension of sentences and for releasing him on bail. The application was rejected on 19.7.93. Thereafter, this (second) application for suspension of sentences and for releasing him on bail was filed on 29.7.93.

(2.) IN Babu Singh v. State of UP : AIR 1978 SC 527, the Supreme court has held that, although application for bail under Section 389, Code of Criminal Procedure at an early stage, was rejected, it does no necessarily preclude another, on a later occasion, giving more materials, further developments and different considerations. In the above view of the matter, the second bail application of the Petitioner is entertainable.

(3.) THE question then is, - What are the factors to be considered for the exercise of power under Section 389(1) Cord of Criminal Procedure In Harbhajan Singh v. State of Punjab : 1977 CriLJ 1424 a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that administration of criminal justice is matter of substance and not merely one of academics. It would afford scant satisfaction to the accused if after serving his full or substantial part of sentence, his appeal succeeds and he is merely acquitted of the charge. This factor cannot be ignored. Therefore, the accused is entitled to the concession of bail. In that case, a decision of a Full Bench of that court in State of Punjab v. Bachitter Singh : 1972 CriLJ 341 was considered and observed thus: