TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 1404X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of any of their legal rights which entitled them to a writ of mandamus or any other directions of a like nature; and pending such determination it might have made a suitable interim order for maintaining the status quo ante. As could be seen from the above said paragraph of KARTAR SINGH VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB [ 1994 (3) TMI 379 - SUPREME COURT] this Court has made it very clear that High Court has no power to entertain an application for bail Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It has made further clear that the power should be exercised sparingly relating to the cases under the 1987 Act, that too only in rare and appropriate cases in extreme circumstances. Upon the said passage from the judgment of Kartar Singh case, lear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the learned Magistrate directing that in the event of moving bail application by Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 herein, they shall be enlarged on bail on their furnishing personal bonds and one surety each to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. The said portion of the order is seriously questioned placing reliance upon the two judgments of this Court, namely, State of Gujarat v. Salimbhai Abdulgaffar Shaikh and Ors. reported in (2003) 8 SCC 50, paragraph 16 and Hema Mishra v. State of U.P. and Ors. reported in (2014) 4 SCC 453, particularly paragraphs 13, 21 and 22. Mr. Sidharth Luthra, learned senior Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 also placed reliance on the very same judgment in justification of the direction given to the learned M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 had sought interim prayer in the application in the writ petition seeking for stay of arrest of Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 herein and they cannot be arrested pursuant to FIR dated 9.09.2014 during the pendency of the writ petition. In fact, such a relief was granted in favour of Respondent Nos. 1 to 4. He further placed reliance upon the judgment of Hema Mishra (supra) at paragraph 13, wherein the Constitution Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab reported in (1994) 3 SCC 569, relevant paragraph 368(17) was extracted in which the Constitution Bench of this Court has held that though it cannot be said that the High Court has no jurisdiction to entertain an application for bail Under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e have very carefully perused the impugned order passed by the High Court, the prayer made in the writ petition praying for issue of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, calling for the records and quashing the Order dated 22.08.2014 passed by the National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi and quashing FIR dated 9.09.2014 registered before P.S. Rajpur. The High Court has not granted the said relief after hearing the learned Counsel on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and the learned Counsel for the State. Having declined to grant the prayer sought for in the writ petition to quash the FIR registered against Respondent Nos. 1 to 4, the High Court should not have given the direction, as extracted above, to the learned Magi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f facilitating the institution of such suit, issue directions in the nature of temporary injunctions, Under Article 226 of the Constitution....the language of Article 226 does not permit such an action. It has clearly been held that Article 226 does not permit such an action to grant any interim prayer. Therefore, the learned senior Counsel for the Appellant has rightly placed reliance upon the aforesaid extract of the judgment in Hema Mishra case (supra). Further, as could be seen from paragraph 13 of the aforesaid decision in Hema Mishra case wherein Paragraph 368(17) was extracted from the Constitution Bench judgment in the case of Kartar Singh (supra) wherein the constitutional validity of Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The reliance upon the aforesaid passage from the judgment of Katar Singh case has no application to the fact situation for the reason that the High Court has neither given any reason, whatsoever, for exercising its power sparingly and also not mentioned that the case for grant of such direction is in extreme circumstances. In the absence of not assigning such reasons the learned senior Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 cannot place reliance upon the said decision of the Constitution Bench of this Court. Therefore, we have to accept the submission made by learned senior Counsel for the Appellant that exercise of power by the High Court giving mandatory direction to the learned Magistrate to consider the bail application that would be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
