Through this petition, the petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in cases F.hR No, 445 of 2007, dated 12.09 2007 for offences under Sections 440,447, 379, 148 and 149 PPC registered at. Police Station Saddar Khatian District Guj rat.
2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the standing crop of the complainant, was destroyed by the petitioner and others and consequently, the aforementioned F.I.R was lodged.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was allowed post-arrest bail by the learned lower Court on 26.04.2008 on valid reasons which was recalled by the learned Additional Sessions Judge on the grounds beyond the scope of Section 497(5) Cr.P.C; that the offences do not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C. and that the petitioner is behind the bars for the last about three months and, therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail.
4. The learned Deputy Prosecutor General assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the petition.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.
6. The learned Judicial Magistrate Section-30 vide order dated 26.04.2008 admitted the petitioner to post-arrest bail on the grounds that the petitioner was no more required by the police; that the offences did not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C. and that civil litigation was pending between the parties. Subsequently, on an application filed by the complainant the order was recalled by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Kharian on 13.11.2008 inter alia on the ground that the petitioner had concealed the fact from the learned Magistrate that his pre-arrest bail had been declined on merits. It is worth noting that the petitioner had applied for post-arrest bail and not pre-arrest bail. Had it been a second petition for post-arrest bail it would have been obligatory upon the petitioner to disclose the fate of the first petition which was not the case. Thus, the ground on which the bail was cancelled by the learned lower Court was neither valid nor sustainable under the law. Further, no extraordinary circumstance was mentioned by the learned lower Court for recalling the bail granted to the petitioner by the learned Magistrate, Moreover, civil litigation is pending between the parties and at this stage, the petitioner who is behind the bars is not required by the police for any purpose.
7. For what has been stated above, this petition is Allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs, 50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.