- (1.) K. Narayan, J. The petitioners have approached this Court with a prayer for a direction to the opposite parties Nos. 1 to 3, not to arrest the petitioners in the matter of Crime No. 469-A of 1994. There has also been another prayer for quashing the first information report through a writ of certiorari which has been deleted by the learned Counsel. After deletion of this prayer, the opposite party No. 4 has also become an unnecessary party and he has also been discharged.
(2.) THE learned Counsel for the petitioners has urged that because the offences alleged in the said F. I. R. , are under Sections 392, 307, 504 323 and 506,i. P. C. , their bail is not likely to be considered by the Magistrate and they may have to be in jail for some time before the bail matter goes to the Court of Sessions. Out of the above sections, only Section 307 I. P. C. , is triable by the Court of Sessions and the rest are triable by the Magistrate. In view of the arguments of learned Counsel, his main grievance appears to be that the Magistrates generally are not considering the bail application in respect of offences tribal by the Court of Sessions on merits and they are being disposed of a general sentence, in the nature 'tribal by the Court of Sessions, rejected. ' This does not appear to be the correct approach. Needless to say, that the High Court cannot afford to keen on giving directions in every case and the law in this behalf is quite certain after the decisions of this Court in Krishna Kant Misra v. Suresh Chandra Misra and others, 1984 Allahabad Nirnay Patrika page 33 ; Vijai Kumar and others v. Uttar Pradesh Rajya and others, 1989 Allahabad Vidhi Dand Nirnay page 388 and Kishore Kumar and others v. State of U. P. and others 1985 ACC 390, that the Magistrate while considering bail application even in respect of offences which are liable by the Court of Sessions has authority and is expected to apply his mind as to whether there are reason able grounds for believing the man is guilty of the offence or not Out of these, the case of Vijai Kumar happens to be a Division Bench decision and there is no occasion for taking a different view. Apart from this all these decisions of the High Court was under law binding upon the Judges of the trial Court and may not be ignored. In view of the above position of law, the petition is disposed of with an observation that in case the petitioners surrender themselves before the Court of Magistrate and apply for bail, their bail matter shall be considered and disposed of expeditiously in the light of the above observations and in the event of rejection, it shall be by a speaking order. Petition disposed of. .;