RAYEES Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD .

(2.) THE case was initially registered under Sections 376, 511 and 354/34 of the Indian Penal Code and on investigation police submitted Final Report under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code. The police admitted the petitioner to bail also. The allegation against the petitioner was that he caught hold of the leg of the lady. On submission of the Final Report, the Magistrate who might be the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Araria, took cognizance of the offence under the original Sections under which the F.I.R. had been lodged. The court does not dispute the jurisdiction of the Magistrate in doing that but what he did was that the bond of the petitioner was cancelled without any notice to him and when the petitioner appeared with the prayer for bail he was remanded to custody. It is hardly required to be pointed out that bail granted by the police is also as good a bail as granted by any court and that could not be cancelled arbitrarily. The law set down by this Court specially in Mahendra Prasad Singh vs. The State of Bihar reported in 2004(3) P.L.J.R., 491 points out that the Magistrate may cancel the bond but before doing so he has to hear the accused also. The above was not the end of the matter. An Officer of the rank of Additional Sessions Judge went ahead with the illegalities in refusing the prayer in B.P. No. 293 of 2009. The above are the situations under which the petitioner has approached this Court with the present prayer for bail.

(3.) THE Court is over burdened with the dockets of bail petitions merely because the sub -ordinate Officers are refusing the prayer under an impression that by rejecting prayers they will be purchasing peace of their minds and will convince this Court about their integrity. The Court has other ideas about the approach in such a case. If an Officer rejected the prayer for bail or cancelled the bond illegally against the settled principle of law, then he could not be said to be honest evert if he may not be dishonest, because if one does not follow the rules of law and acts as per his whims and caprice then he could not claim himself to be an honest Officer. The action appears unpardonable. I, as such, direct the Registrar General of the Court to obtain explanations from the Officers involved in the whole episode and place it before the Hon 'ble Inspecting Judge of Purnea Judgeship for needful.