Lotan Singh vs State

A.H. Khan, J.—Mr. R. S. Bajpai, deputy Government Advocate has taken notice of this application, which is presented on behalf of the two accused persons, Lotansingh and Siromansingh under Sec. 498 Cr. P. Code for bail in a case Under Sec. 395 and Sec.365 IPC pending against them. It is alleged in the FIR that the gang of Sikandara dacoit went to village Dev-jupura and looted the houses of Shyam and Raghuvir and took away property worth about Rs. 10, 000/-. The gang is also said to have taken away with it a child aged about 4 years.

Of the two accused, Lotansingh on knowing that the Police had registered a case against him surrendered himself before the Special Judge, Bhind. After being in police custody for six days he was put up for identification and one Mst. Ram Dulari, aged about 60 years indentified him as a person who committed the dacoity. But curiously enough this woman also identified nine other persons who were mixed up with the accused as being the dacoits as well. Similarly she identified the other petitioner Siromansingh. I shall not discuss here as to what value is to be attached to such identification, but in the circumstances it is a fit case in which the accused should be admitted to bail. Moreover nothing has been recovered from the possession of these two persons.

The learned Special Judge refused bail on the ground that the district Bhind is a disturbed area and that the offence is a serious one. This is not a correct approach in granting bail. Every case must be considered on its merits. A Court must not feel scared and without loosing its nerves must pass an order which it should pass. Where circumstances of a case justify the release of the accused on bail, bail should be unhesitatingly granted.

I, therefore, direct that if both the accused execute bonds for Rs. 3000/- each and furnish security for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, they shall be released on bail till the decision of the trial Court.