STATE Vs. SURINDER SINGH KAIRON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts giving rise to the two criminal miscellaneous applications Nos. 379 -D and 389 -D of 1965, one filed by the Public Prosecutor, Punjab, and the other by Surinder Singh Kairon accused may briefly be noticed here. The Chamkaur Sahib police registered a case under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act read with Sections 411, 414 and 409/109 of the Indian Penal Code on the basis of First information report No. 37 dated 18th August, 1964, amongst others also against Surinder Singh Kairon accused. The Judicial Magistrate, Rupar, on 21st July, 1965, issued a non -bailable warrant for his arrest. Harinder Singh. Deputy Superintendent of Police, in pursuance of the warrant arrested him on 24th July 1965, at Delhi and as was required under Section 86 of the Code of Criminal Procedure he produced him before the Additional District Magistrate, Delhi. The later by his order of the same date enlarged Surinder Singh Kairon on bail on his executing a bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000 with one surety in the like amount. The accused was directed to appear before the Judicial Magistrate, Rupar, on or before 31st July, 1965. and to produce a certificate of his having done so by 5th August, 1965, before him. The bail was granted up to 5th August, 1965. The learned Additional District Magistrate addressed a letter to the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Chandigarh, on 26th July, 1965, to inform him whether there were other charges also against the accused in connection with the same first information report. The accused filed an application on 30th July, 1965, before the Additional District Magistrate, Delhi, for extending the time for his appearance before the Judicial Magistrate, Rupar, on grounds of illness, etc. The learned Additional District Magistrate extended the operation of the bail bonds already executed upto 31st August. 1965, and informed the Judicial Magistrate, Rupar, accordingly.

(2.) THE Public Prosecutor, Punjab, in his Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 379 -D of 1965 alleged that all the orders passed by the learned Additional District Magistrate, Delhi, were illegal and had resulted in grave miscarriage of justice by depriving the police of its lawful right of interrogating the accused by obtaining his personal custody. He, therefore, prayed that the learned Additional District Magistrate's order dated 24th July, 1965, and subsequent orders passed in continuation thereof might be set aside and the accused be ordered to be produced in custody in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Rupar. He mentioned in Para. 15 of his application that since there was conflict between the Delhi Court and Rupar Magistrate's jurisdiction, the issue could be set at rest only by approaching the High Court.

(3.) THE accused in his criminal miscellaneous application No. 389 -D of 1965 maintained that the learned Additional District Magistrate, Delhi, was seized of the case under Sections 86 and 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and thus could exercise his powers of granting bail under Section 497 of the Code. He further submitted that in case it was held that the learned Additional District Magistrate, Delhi, had no such power, this Court may grant him bail under Section 498 of the Code of Criminal Procedure inter alia on the grounds as reproduced below : "(1) That the instant case is one in the series of cases so started by the Punjab Police. (2) That the first information report in this case was registered on 18th August, 1964, at police station Chamkaur Sahib. (3) That the respondent -applicant is no more needed by the police of (for ?) purposes of interrogation. He has been with the police for interrogation on a number of occasions and attested copies of some of the police notice in this connection are herewith attached. (4) That all other alleged co -accused of the respondent -applicant have been granted bail. (5) That there is no apprehension of his jumping bail and not facing trial. (6) That the provisions of bail are never punitive. (7) That he is an old patient of diabetes and is not keeping good health."