Ashok Kumar Bhola vs State of Punjab

M.M. Punchhi, J.

This is petition from jail by one Ashok Kumar an under trail prisoner, seeking his release on personal bond.

The petitioner is facing trial under sections 457/380. Indian Penal Code, in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class. Phagwara. The value of stolen property is reported to be Rs. 35,928/. The accused petitioner was ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5,000/ with one surety of the like amount. The concession, however, was not availed of by the accused. The prosecution has closed its evidence and the statement of the accused has been recorded. The statement of another accused was to be recorded on 9.5.1985.

The accusedpetitioner is also facing trial under sections 457/380. Indian Penal Code, before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hissar. The case is at the initial stages. Bail order was passed way back on 1751982 but the accused could not avail of it as he could not furnish the requisite surety. The value of the stolen property is reported to be Rs. 42 313. 60 P.

Lastly, the accusedpettioner is facing trial under Sections 547/380/411, Indian Penal Code, before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ambala. He was initially granted bail on 2521982 but since he absented himself, his bail bond was cancelled on 7.3.1982. Since then, he is behind the bars. The value of the stolen property is reported to be Rs. 60000/. The case is fixed for 2.7.2985 for appearance of his coaccused.

Though it is true that the value of the stolen property is heavily loaded against the petitioner, yet at the same time the Courts below have to keep in mind the desirability of disposing of the trials of the petitioner as quickly as possible even having resort to section 317 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, if attracted. The learned Magistrates have also to bear in mind that the period of incarceration as undertrial would be set off against the eventual punishment of imprisonment awarded, if any and that effort should be made that the undertrial period is not proportionately larger than the sentence which the cases of the petitioner might merit. Keeping themselves alive to that situation the respective learned Magistrate may dispose of the cases of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. No ground, however, has been made out to release the petitioner on personal bond. Prayer declined.

JUDGMENT accordingly.