CourtKutchehry.com
High Courts

Suresh Singh and Ors. vs State of U.P.& Ors.

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 18 June 1993 · Citation: (1993) 06 AHC CK 0004

HON’BLE JUDGES
Virendra Saran, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Revision No. 845 of 1993
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 363 words

Virendra Saran, J.—Heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned State counsel.

2.

I am not inclined to interfere with the order dated 2051993 of the III Additional Sessions Judge, Mainpuri in Criminal Revision No. 358 of 1990 Makrand Singh v. Suresh Singh and others.

3.

Considering the entire circumstances and the facts of the case it is directed that the applicants shall not be arrested for a period of 15 days from today to enable them to surrender and apply for bail. When tiey surrender and apply for bail, their application shall be considered according to the following directions ;

(1) If the applicants surrender and apply for bail before the Magistrate concerned, their bail application shall be disposed of the same day.

(2) In case the hearing or disposal of the bail application is adjourned to some future date, the applicant shall be released on their executing personal bonds till that date and on that date the bail application of the applicants shall be finally disposed of in the early hours of the day to enable the applicants to apply for bail in the court of Sessions, in case the bail application is rejected.

(3) The learned Sessions Judge shall also endeavour to dispose of the bail application of the applicants the same day but in case he adjourns the hearing or disposal of the bail application. He shall release the applicants on similar personal bonds until the disposal of the bail application.

4.

However, it is not desirable to send the applicant No. 3 who is a woman to jail at the very threshold since the applicant No. 3 is a woman the learned court below shall extend the benefit of the proviso to Section 437, Cr. P. C. obviating the necessity of sending her to jail. It is further made clear that the learned Magistrate has jurisdiction to admit a woman to bail under the proviso of Section 437 Cr. P. C.

5.

With the above observations, this application is finally disposed of. A certified copy of this order may be given to the learned counsel for the applicants on payment of usual charges within three days.