criminal

Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 24 December 2010 This query is : Resolved
experts,
Plz.advice me on the following query.
The crime has been registered against accused under section 3,4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act.After arrest when accused has been produced before J.M.F.C.,the Magistrate refused to grant bail,giving reasoning that, "According to sec.4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act punishment is provided 10 yrs.Therefore considering nature of punishment I am of the view that the offence u/s.4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act is exclusively triable by sessions court as per second schedule of Cr.P.c. Besides guidelines given by the Hon’ble High Court in a case 2001(3) MhLJ 465 it is provided that in respect of offence for which the maximum sentence prescribed up to life or for 10 years than the bar of sec. 437 would operate and such persons can not be released on bail by the Magistrate. As the Maistrate has no jurisdiction to release such person u/s. 437(1) of Cr.P.C."
I want to know that whether the J.M.F.C.,has power or not to release the accused on bail?Another J.M.F.C.,has released the accused on bail when that accused brought before him after arrest.Which Magistrate's order is justified former or later?

Follow Query

Report Abuse

Devajyoti Barman (Expert) 24 December 2010
At the time of submtting the chrage sheet if it is found that the offence is the triable by the sessions court then the Magistrate makes commitment of the case. Till that time the Maistrate can consider the bail petition though as a matter of practice the Magistrate does not grant the bail. Nevertheless there is nothiing illegality if the magistrate rants bail before the commitment of the accsued peron.

Ajay Bansal (Expert) 27 December 2010
AGREED WITH ABOVE.

Previous

Next

You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .

Click here to login now

Similar Resolved Queries :

Ask Query
Unanswered Queries