JUDGMENT The petitioners, namely Chandradeep Rai and Suresh Rai alias Suresh Prasad, surrendered before Shri N.K.P. Sinha, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna on 17.9.1975 in a case instituted against them and others by the police relating to an occurrence which is alleged to have taken place on 28.8.1975 at 8:30 P. M. The allegations in short, were that the petitioners along with certain others formed an unlawful assembly armed themselves with Farsas and other weapons, trespassed into the hotel of the informant and inflicted injuries with their Farsas on the brother of the informant as a result of which he died. 2. In this application, the nayer is for grant of bail to the petitioners. It was contended that on the merits of the case the petitioners deserved to be enlarged on bail and certain other grounds were also mentioned including the ground that after the preliminary charge-sheet was submitted by the police, the petitioners were not produced before Magistrate and even on 13.12.1975 they were not produce before him and the Magistrate had fixed 17.1.1976 for their production before him, indicating thereby that the petitioners had been in jail for more than 15 days against the express provision of Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The second contention appears to be well founded and fully borne out by the records. The first proviso to Subsection (2) of Section 309 lays down that no Magistrate shall remand an accused person to custody under the said section for a term exceeding 15 days at a time. It is not known whether the Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences mentioned in the preliminary charge-sheet but it is quite clear that the detention of the petitioners in jail is in contravention of the provisions contained in the first provision to sub-section 2. 3. Although after having heard learned counsel for the petitioners on the merit of the application for bail, we are not inclined to grant the prayer, but in view of the illegality pointed out above, the detention of the petitioners in jail cannot be allowed to continue. The petitioner shall be enlarged on furnishing bonds of Rs. 3. Although after having heard learned counsel for the petitioners on the merit of the application for bail, we are not inclined to grant the prayer, but in view of the illegality pointed out above, the detention of the petitioners in jail cannot be allowed to continue. The petitioner shall be enlarged on furnishing bonds of Rs. 8,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned; provided that if the Chief Judicial Magistrate has already taken cognizance of the offences on 17.1.1976 and remanded them to jail after they are produced before him on that date, this order will be inoperative and it will be deemed as if this application has been dismissed. Application allowed.