Back
1998 Supreme(SC) 797
1998(7) Supreme 275
Supreme Court of India
(From Patna High Court)
G.T. Nanavati & S.P. Kurdukar, JJ.
Vijay Kumar Mallik -Appellant
versus
Central Bureau Of Investigation -Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 765-66 of 1998
With
Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 208 of 1997
Decided on 12-8-1998
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appearing Parties : Altaf Ahmad, Additional Solicitor General, D.D. Thakur, U.R. Lalit, Sr. Advocates, Vikas Singh, E.C. Vidya Sagar, L.N. Rao, G.R.K. Prasad, N.N. Bhat, Jitender Singh, V.S. Reddy, A.K. Sinha, A.D.N. Rao, P. Parmeswaran, (B.B. Singh) Advocate (NP) A.K. Sinha, Romy Chackno, Y.P. Mahajan, S.A. Matto, Advocates.
Headnote:Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-Section 167/393-Remand -Appeal against-Remand order upheld by High Court-Obtaining order of remand process of court not abused - Interference unwarranted.
Judgment
Nanavati, J.-We have heard learned counsel for both the sides.
In our opinion considering the stage at which the matter was when the impugned order came to be passed by the trial Court and which has been upheld by the High Court it cannot be said that by making an application for remand and obtaining an order for remand from the Court, the respondent can be said to have abused the process of the court. We would have given reasons in support of our order but as the matters are still pending in different courts, we do not think it proper to do so.
The appeals and writ petition are disposed of.
(C.R.)
***********
