he Supreme Court has ordered a petitioner to pay ₹ 5,000 in costs after he filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging a Magistrate’s order granting bail to an accused.
There was no justification for the petitioner to file a writ petition immediately before the Supreme Court challenging the Magistrate’s order, according to Justices Vineet Saran and CT Ravikumar.
“This writ case was brought under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution, challenging the Magistrate’s ruling granted bail to respondents 2 through 5. To begin with, we find no reason why the petitioner should have filed this writ petition in this Court immediately contesting the Magistrate’s ruling “The Court took notice of this.
The Magistrate who had granted bail and the Additional District Judge who had refused to interfere with the Magistrate’s order had both been impleaded as respondents to the writ petition, according to the Court.
“Furthermore, we are perplexed as to why the judge who granted bail has been named as respondent no.6 and why the Additional District Judge, who has refused to interfere with the Magistrate’s order, has been named as respondent no.7,” the Court said.
The petition was dismissed with costs of ₹ 5,000 to be placed with the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Welfare Fund within four weeks after the Court condemned the petitioner’s behavior.
Case: Balakram @ Bhura vs State of UP.
