{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2499 OF 2010 Sow.Meera w/o Dnyandeo Pogade APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr. R.M.Deshmukh, Advocate for the applicant Mr. D.V.Tele, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 15th July 2010 PER COURT: 1. This criminal application takes exception to the order dated 23.06.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Jalna below Exhibt-1 in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.16/2010. By the impugned order the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Jalna has set aside the order of bail granted in favour of the present applicant by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ghansawangi u/s 437 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The learned Magistrate, in exercise of jurisdiction vested in him, has released the applicant, who is a lady, on bail as an exceptional case on medical grounds. {2} 2. After the present application came to be filed, directions were given to learned APP to verify the medical papers, which were submitted by the applicant before the learned Magistrate. Today, along with the report of the concerned police station, report received from Dr.Ashok Lohalekar, is placed before me along with papers of medical treatment provided to the applicant. The said report and the medical papers indicate that the applicant is suffering from chronic psoriasis (a type of skin disease) for which the applicant requires constant medical treatment and the learned Magistrate has granted bail to her only on that count. 3. After perusing the order passed by the learned Magistrate, it appears that while granting bail to the applicant, the learned Magistrate just relied on the medical papers submitted by the applicant and it appears that he has not taken care to send the said medical papers for verification. From perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, it appears that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has heavily came down on the order passed by the learned Magistrate and has observed that through the offence for which the applicant is charged is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, yet the learned Magistrate has exercised the discretion. On perusal of sub section (2) of section 437 of the Criminal Procedure Code, it is clear that obviously, the discretion is vested with learned Magistrate. 4. This Court requires to consider that whether the {3} discretion is exercised by the learned Magistrate judiciously or arbitrarily. It appears that the only fault on the part of the learned Magistrate is that he relied on the medical papers submitted by the applicant without verification. However, from the verification report, received today, it appears that the medical papers produced by the applicant seeking bail are genuine. In the premise, I do not find any fault with the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, which is erroneously set aside by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Jalna. Therefore, the impugned order requires to be quash and set aside. 5. Consequently, the application succeeds. The impugned order dated 23.06.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Jalna below Exhibit-1 in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.16/2010 by which the bail granted in favour of the applicant by the Magistrate was cancelled, is hereby quashed and set aside. The order dated 15.04.2010 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ghansawangi, Dist-Jalna is hereby restored and the bail granted in favour of the applicant in exercise of discretion vested in learned Magistrate u/s 437 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, is hereby confirmed. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/criapln2499-10