IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.6456 of 2011 1. Ram Pravesh Yadav, Son of Jamadar Rai, R/o-Vill.-Murlee P.S.- Chhauradano, District-East Champaran. 2. Rukhsana Khatoon, W/o-Late Lal Mohammad, R/o-Vill.-Raghunathpur, P.S.- Chhauradano, District-East Champaran. –Petitioners. VERSUS The State of Bihar -Opposite Party. WITH Cr. Misc. No.4962 of 2011 1. Nek Mohammed, Son of Rajbali Mian, R/o-Vill.-Gulariya (Pipra), P.S.-Darpa, District-East Champaran. 2. Noor Alam Mian, Son of Adalat Mian, R/o-Vill.-Pipra, P.S.-Darpa, District- East Champaran. –Petitioners. VERSUS The State of Bihar -Opposite Party. ----------- 02 14.03.2011 In both these cases the petitioners are in custody in relation to Chiraiya P.S. Case No.132 of 2010 instituted under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, read with Arms Act, Explosive Substance Act and Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1908. I have perused the order as passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, East Champaran, Motihari by which their bail applications have been rejected. I cannot restrain myself but observe that the said order is an apology for an order. An order rejecting bail is nevertheless a judicial order passed by a Judicial Officer in his judicial capacity. Unfortunately, the order reflects as if it has been passed in a casual manner by an Officer not trained in judicial matters and it totally lacks judicial temperament. There is absolutely non- application of mind. The order only says that witnesses have supported the incident and the case diary shows involvement of the petitioners and chargesheets have been submitted. The Judicial Officer and, that too, of the rank of Additional Sessions Judge should - 2 - keep in mind that these orders are subject to judicial review by the High Court. They are supposed to apply their mind and disclose as to what is the material as against the petitioner, which persuades the Court not to grant bail. It cannot throw its responsibility on the High Court to call of all the records and reexamine the thing. When all the records were available to him that only shows that the Officers though writes three pages order is shirking his responsibility, either he lacks the courage for conviction or refuses to apply his mind judicially. There must be cogent reasons recorded which can be examined by the High Court from the order sheet itself. In such view of the matter, I am left with no option but to remit the matter back to the learned Judge for reconsideration in proper perspective without shirking his responsibility and showing his incompetence in the matter. The learned Judge would be well advised to reconsider the matter and pass fresh orders within two weeks of filing of fresh application before him. Let the order be communicated by FAX to the learned Judge at the cost of the petitioners. Let the order also be sent to the Bihar Judicial Academy so that they may consider teaching the Judicial Officers about the right approach in writing such orders. Both the applications are, accordingly, disposed of. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)