Satish Chandra vs State Of U.P. And Others
2019 Latest Caselaw 6284 ALL

Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 6284 ALL
Judgement Date : 1 August, 2019

Allahabad High Court

Satish Chandra vs State Of U.P. And Others on 1 August, 2019

Bench: Sudhir Agarwal




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 34
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1788 of 1987
 

 
Revisionist :- Satish Chandra
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Others
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- A.B.L. Gaur
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.G.A.,Rajesh Ji Verma
 

 
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.

1. Heard Sri A.B.L. Gaur, learned Senior Counsel for revisionist and perused the material available on record.

2. This criminal revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C., has been filed aggrieved by judgement and order dated 18.11.1987 passed by Sri J.P. Mishra, In-charge Sessions Judge, Etah in Criminal Bail Application No. 548 of 1987 (State vs. Satish Chandra @ Chunna) remanding the case to learned Magistrate to reconsider the matter after taking into account that case is one under Section 436 IPC and not under Section 435 IPC and for passing suitable bail order in the matter.

3. A charge-sheet under Section 435 IPC was submitted by police and Magistrate concerned also granted bail under Section 435 IPC. Thereafter, an application for cancellation of bail was filed before Sessions Judge, Etah and in the impugned order dated 18.11.1987, it has held that offence, in fact, is made out under Section 436 IPC which is non-bailable and is not triable by Magistrate. Sessions Judge, therefore, directed the Magistrate to treat the case under Section 436 IPC and pass suitable fresh bail order.

4. It is contended that Sessions Court has no jurisdiction to convert the case under Section 436 IPC particularly, when charge-sheet was filed under Section 435 IPC and Magistrate concerned has taken cognizance thereon and granted bail. If any offence has been found, Magistrate can always change the section and thereafter proceed further by Sessions Judge by passing an order on application for cancellation of bail but such an alteration could not have been upheld by Sessions Judge.

5. Learned AGA also could not dispute that the manner in which Sessions Judge proceeded is wholly illegal.

6. In the result, revision is allowed. Impugned order dated 18.11.1987 passed in Bail Cancellation Application No. 548 of 1987 is hereby set aside.

7. Certify this judgment to the lower Court immediately.

Order Date :- 1.8.2019

Siddhant Sahu