Vishnu Pratap Singh @ Ramesh Tomar @ Damru vs State of U.P.& Anr.

Shailendra Saksena, J.—Main grievance of the petitioner in this case is that he is being detained in District Jail, Lucknow in some other case. Although, the Court at Faizabad has sent warrantB but is not entertaining bail application of the petitioner mainly on the ground that the accusedpetitioner has not appeared before the Court and unless he appears before the Court, his bail application cannot be considered.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the principle of law laid down in the case reported in 1997 JIC 298(All), Arvind & Anr. v. State of U.P., wherein it was laid that where the accused is involved in different offences and is lodged in jail in one District, and bail application is moved in another District for another offence, the Court at another District should not insist for production of accused in another Court''s jurisdiction.

I have heard the learned Counsel for the accusedpetitioner and have perused the facts.

The accusedpetitioner is already in jail. WarrantB has already been executed against him of the Court, from which the petitioner has prayed for bail.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that the Court concerned at Faizabad will consider the bail application of the accusedpetitioner and will dispose of the same in accordance with law.

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.