SARVESH NARAIN SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF U P
LAWS(ALL)-2007-5-34
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on May 01,2007

SARVESH NARAIN SHUKLA Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF U P Respondents

JUDGEMENT

RAVINDRA SINGH,J. - (1.) THIS application has been filed by Sarvesh Narain Shukla with a prayer to set aside the order dated 4 -4 -2007 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhadohi whereby the case of the accused O.P. No. 2, Udai Bhan Singh alias Doctor Singh has been committed to the Court of Sessions and the accused has been sent to District Jail Gyanpur by issuing the custody warrant in case No. 817 of 2007.
(2.) HEARD Sri G.S. Chaturvedi, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri A.K. Dwivedi, learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and Sri Dileep Kumar, Sri Rajiv Gupta and Sri P.K. Singh and Sri A.K. Singh, learned Counsel for O.P. No. 2. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhadohi has passed the committal order of the accused Udai Bhan Singh alias Doctor Singh on 4 -4 -2007 in case No. 817 of 2007 under Sections 147, 148, 307, 120 -B I.P.C. and 7th Criminal Law Amendment Act and on the same day custody warrant for detaining the accused in District Jail Gyanpur has been prepared by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhadohi in one other cases also as Case No. 2516/2006, 374 of 2007 and 1211 of 2005. The custody warrant was prepared for detaining the above -mentioned accused in District Jail Gyanpur. The custody warrant prepared in four cases directing the above mentioned accused to detain in District Jail Gyanpur are illegal because the above mentioned accused was brought from the District Jail Lucknow in pursuance of Warrant -B and he was produced in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhadohi. The learned C.J.M. was under obligation to send the above mentioned accused to District Jail Lucknow as provided in Form 36 of Scheduled II of Cr.P.C. which is reproduced as under : “Form No. 36 Orders Requiring production In Court of Person In Prison for Answering To Charge of Offence (See Section 267) To The Officer in Charge of the Jail at .............. Whereas the attendance of (name of prisoner) at present/detained in above mentioned prison, is required in this Court to answer to a charge of (State shortly the offence charged) or for the purpose of a proceedings (State shortly the particulars of the proceeding) : You are hereby required to produced the said .............. under safe and sure conduct before this Court on the day of .............. 19 by a.m. thereto answer to the said charge, or for the purpose of the said proceedings, and after this Court has dispensed with his further attendance, cause him to be conveyed under safe and sure conduct back to the said prison. And you are further required to inform the said .............. of contents of this order and deliver to him the attached copy thereof. Dated this day of 19 (Seal of the Court) (Signature) Countersigned (Signature)”
(3.) ACCORDING to the language of Form 36 the accused, who was sent back to the same Jail from where he was brought and produced to the Court concerned, therefore, all the four custody warrants prepared by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhadohi are illegal and liable to be set aside and the and the accused Udai Narain Shukla alias Doctor Singh may be sent to District Jail Lucknow from District Jail Bhadohi.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.