JUDGMENT The applicant was taken into custody in connection with Crime No. 98/99 registered for the offences punishable under sections 363, 366 and 376 and 3(i) (xii) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. This matter came up for hearing on 12.7.99, On that day Mr. Husain submitted that after expiry of 90 days as the charge-sheet had not been filed, an application for grant of bail in accordance with [he provisions enshrined under section 167(2) CrPC was filed before the learned Special Judge, Hoshangabad but the said Court had refused to accept the petition on the ground that an application for regular bail is pending before this' Court. Taking note of the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant it was directed that if such an application would be filed before the learned Special Judge, he would do well to dispose of the same in accordaoce with law. The matter was adjourned to 16.7.99. Today, it is submitted by Mr. Husain, that in pursuance of the order dated 12.7.99 an application was filed before the learned Special Judge, Hoshangabad, on 13.7.99 and the learned Special Judge on consideration of the same has enlarged the applicant on bail. It is further submitted by Mr. Husain that certain Courts are not entertaining the petitions under section 167(2) of CrPC if the application for grant of regular bail is pending before the higher Courts. Needless to emphasize that the grant of regular bail on merits stands on a different footing then grant of bail in accordance with the provisions engrafted tinder section 167(2) of CrPC. Pendency of an application for grant of regular bail before the higher Courts does not debar the Court below to exercise its jurisdiction as provided under 167(2) of CrPC if circumstances so warrant. It is hereby made clear that if an application is filed in quite promptitude after the expiry of the stipulated time the same should be dealt with in accordance with law.