Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Gurmit Singh and anr. Vs. the State

Gurmit Singh and anr. vs The State

Disposition Application allowed Court Orissa Decided Jan 29, 1986
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/529712

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Orissa High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Criminal Misc. Case No. 56 of 1986
Subject
Criminal
Disposition
Application allowed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 [C.A. No. 59/1988]Section 173(1) Proviso; [D. Biswas, Amitava Roy & I.A.Ansari, JJ] Appeal without statutory deposit but within limitation/or extended period of limitation Maintainability - Held, If the provision of a statute speaks of entertainment of appeal, it denotes that the appeal ...

Key legal issue
Criminal
Outcome / disposition
Application allowed
Acts & sections
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 436, 437 and 441

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Gurmit Singh and anr.

Advocate B.B. Ratho, R.P. Mohapatra, Manoj Mishra, A.K. Satpathy, D. Biswal and B.N. Rath

Respondent

The State

Advocate D.P. Sahoo, Standing Counsel

Legal References

Acts
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 436, 437 and 441
Reported In
1986(I)OLR229

Excerpt

.....(1) of section 173 of the act does not extend to the provision relating to the deposit of statutory amount as embodies in the first proviso. therefore an appeal filed within the period of limitation or within the extended period of limitation, cannot be admitted for hearing on merit unless the statutory deposit is made either with the memo of appeal or on such date as may be permitted by the court. no specific order condoning any delay for the purpose of deposit under first proviso to sub-section (1) of section 173 is necessary. [new india assurance co. ltd. v md. makubur rahman, 1993 (2) glr 430 and new india assurance co. ltd. v smt rita devi, 1997(2) glt 406, approved. new india assurance co. ltd. v birendra mohan de, 1995 (2) gau lt 218 (db) and union of india v smt gita banik, 1996 (2) glt 246, are not good law]. - 10,000/- each with two local sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the subdivisional judicial magistrate, koraput. it has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the bail amount with a direction to furnish two local sureties for the like amount has been excessive and is not sustainable and, therefore, modification has been sought. 5,000/- (rupees five thousand) with two sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the subdivisional judicial magistrate, koraput......each of the two petitioners has been admitted to bail by mr. s. misra, the learned additional sessions judge at jeypore. the petitioners have been required to furnish bail of rs. 10,000/- each with two local sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the subdivisional judicial magistrate, koraput.2. i have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned standing counsel, having admitted the application. it has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the bail amount with a direction to furnish two local sureties for the like amount has been excessive and is not sustainable and, therefore, modification has been sought.3. the amount of every bail bond shall be fixed with due regard to the circumstances of the case and shall not be excessive. in air 1978 s.c, 1594 : moti ram and others v. state of madhya pradesh, the supreme court has observed and held :'to add insult to injury, the magistrate has demanded sureties from his own district (we assume the allegation in the petition). what is a malayalees, kannadiga, tamil or telugu to do if arrested for alleged misappropriation or theft or criminal trespass in bastar, port blair, pahalgam or chandni chowk he cannot have sureties owning properties in these distant places. he may not know any one there and might have come in a batch or to seek a job or in a morcha. judicial disruption of indian unity is surest achieved by such provincial allergies. what law prescribes sureties from outside or non-regional language applications what law prescribes the geographical discrimination implicit in asking for sureties from the court district this tendency takes many forms, sometimes, geographic, sometimes linguistic, sometimes legalistic. article 14 protects all indians quo indians, within the territory of india. article 350 sanctions representation to any authority, including a court, for redress of grievances in any language used in the union of india. equality before the law implies that even a.....

Full Judgment

B.K. Behera, J.

1. Accused of offences punishable under Sections 279, 537 and 304 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, each of the two petitioners has been admitted to bail by Mr. S. Misra, the learned Additional Sessions Judge at Jeypore. The petitioners have been required to furnish bail of Rs. 10,000/- each with two local sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Koraput.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel, having admitted the application. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the bail amount with a direction to furnish two local sureties for the like amount has been excessive and is not sustainable and, therefore, modification has been sought.

3. The amount of every bail bond shall be fixed with due regard to the circumstances of the case and shall not be excessive. In AIR 1978 S.C, 1594 : Moti Ram and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the Supreme Court has observed and held :

'To add insult to injury, the Magistrate has demanded sureties from his own district (we assume the allegation in the petition). What is a Malayalees, Kannadiga, Tamil or Telugu to do if arrested for alleged misappropriation or theft or criminal trespass in Bastar, Port Blair, Pahalgam or Chandni Chowk He cannot have sureties owning properties in these distant places. He may not know any one there and might have come in a batch or to seek a job or in a morcha. Judicial disruption of Indian unity is surest achieved by such provincial allergies. What law prescribes sureties from outside or non-regional language applications What law prescribes the geographical discrimination implicit in asking for sureties from the Court district This tendency takes many forms, sometimes, geographic, sometimes linguistic, sometimes legalistic. Article 14 protects all Indians quo Indians, within the territory of India. Article 350 sanctions representation to any authority, including a Court, for redress of grievances in any language used in the Union of India. Equality before the law implies that even a vakalat or affirmation made in any State language according to the law in that State must be accepted everywhere in the territory of India save where a valid legislation to the contrary exists. Otherwise, an adivasi will be unfree in Free India, and likewise many other minorities. This divagation has become necessary to still the judicial beginnings, and to inhibit the process of making Indians aliens in their own homeland. Swaraj is made of united stuff.'

4. In my view, the amount of bail in the circumstances of the case has been excessive. The learned Additional Sessions Judge was not justified in directing the petitioners to furnish local sureties for their release on bail.

5. For the foregoing reasons, I would modify the order and direct the release of each of the petitioners on a bail of Rs. 5,000/- (rupees five thousand) with two sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Koraput.

6. The Criminal Miscellaneous Case is accordingly allowed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial