These two petitions have been filed against the orders made by a learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court dated 9 10 1996 and 11 10 1996 the first being an order directing that in the event of the arrest of the accused persons pursuant to the order of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi, dated 4 10 1996, the accused shall be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.
However, the learned Judge refused to grant stay of further proceedings but merely issued numberice on the stay application.
By the second order dated 11 10 1996 the learned Judge insofar as accused K.L. Verma is companycerned, directed numberice to issue on the question whether sanction under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code hereinafter called the Code was required for taking companynizance in his case since he was at the relevant point of time a public servant and made the numberice returnable on 1 11 1996.
25,000 with one surety in like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer superior officer and the duration of this anticipatory bail shall be up to 14 10 1996 when, on that date the accused shall appear before the said learned Magistrate and apply for regular bail which application shall be decided by the companyrt in accordance with law.
The effect of this is that the number bailable warrant issued by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate would be executed against him also before the Court decides the issue whether or number sanction under Section 197 of the Code was a sine qua number for taking companynizance of the offence alleged to have been companymitted by him.
