SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- G. B. Pattanaik, C.J.I. and U.C. Banerjee, JJ.

Civil Appeal No. 728 of 1999, (arising out of SLP (Cri.) No. 1251 of 1999). D/d. 2.8.1999.

Bihari Prasad Singh - Appellant

Versus

The State of Bihar and another - Respondents

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 438 - Bail - Revisional jurisdiction - Exercise of - High Court refused to entertain revision on the ground that accused has not surrendered - Such condition not provided by Patna High Court Rules - Impugned order set and High court to decide revision application on merit.

[Paras 3 and 4]

JUDGMENT

Leave granted.

2. The only question that requires consideration in the present case is whether the High Court while exercising its revisional jurisdiction can refuse to hear or entertain the matter on the ground that the accused has not surrendered.

3. Under the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code, there is no such requirement though many High Courts in this country have made such provision in the respective rules of the High Court. But it is stated to us that there is no such rule in the Patna High Court Rules. In that view of the matter the High Court was not justified in rejecting the application for revision solely on the ground that the accused has not surrendered.

4. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and direct that the revision application be taken up by the High Court on merits. We make it clear that our order does not disentitle the High Court to dismiss the revision on merits.

5. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Order accordingly.