H.N. Kapoor, J. - (1.) THIS is a petition under Section 482 read with Section 483, Cr.P.C. praying that the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahr be directed to withdraw from the court of Judicial Ma gistrate First, Bulandshahr the matter relating to the acceptance of personal surety bonds of the applicant for the purpose of her release on bail.
(2.) IN this case the petitioner has been prosecuted under Sections 4571380 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner, who is a lady, was allowed to be released on bail by this Court on July 25, 1973. She was to be released on furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate. However, it appears that the Chief Judicial Magistrate transmitted the matter of bail also to Sri TXM. Arya, Judicial Magistrate First, Bulandshahr. The petitioner Was required to furnish two sureties which were furnished each of Rs. 6,0001 - on February 16, 1974. The Magistrate, however, insisted for local sureties, on September 19, 1974, local sureties were furnish ed supported by documents. They were sent for verification to the Station Officer of Police Station concerned. It appears that no report at all was submitted by the Police Station concerned. The petitioner then filed fresh sureties on December 6, 1974. The Magistrate direct ed the same to be verified by the Tahsildar as well as the Station Offi cer of the police station concerned. The Tahsildar then submitted a report dated December 13, 1974. A certified copy of that report has been shown to me. It is to the effect that the sureties are reliable to the extent of Rs. 6,0001- each. The Station Officer, however, did not submit any report. On December 16, 1974, another application was moved praying that the sureties furnished may be accepted on the basis of the report of the Tahsildar. The learned Magistrate is said to have uttered some words to the effect that he was least affected by the order of the Hon'ble High Court and that he would show his po wers. A reminder to the Station Officer was then sent for submitting the report. The Station Officer, however, has not yet submitted any report with the result that the petitioner is still under detention in spite of the order passed by this Court for releasing the petitioner on bail as early as on July 25, 1973. To say the least, it is gross abuse of the process of the court that the petitioner should remain in jail even though an order for her release has been passed by this Court on July 25, 1973. It appears that a transfer application too has been moved in this Court against the Magistrate which is still pending. In that case, the explanation of the Magistrate has been asked for. It shall be decided in that case whether the Magistrate did utter such words, as alleged or not. So far as the matter of bail is concerned, it can certainly be said that that the learned Magistrate either surrendered his powers completely to the Station Officer or has shown utter dis regard in discharging his duties, in allowing the matter to prolong for such a long time on some pretext or the other. There is no reason why the report of the Tehsildar alone could not have been accepted.
(3.) IN the result, the petition is accordingly allowed. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, district Bulandshahr is directed to withdraw the matter relating to the acceptance of the surety bonds from the court of Shri D.M. Arya, Judicial Magistrate First, Bulandshahr and him self pass final orders with regard to the acceptance of surety bonds and releasing the petitioner on bail according to the order of this Court dated July 25, 1973. He shall dispose of the matter expeditiously in the light of the observations made above.;