SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(SC) 464

UMESH C.BANERJEE, G.B.PATTANAIK
Enforcement Officer, Ted, Bombay – Appellant
Versus
Bher Chand Tikaji Bora – Respondent


ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The Enforcemnt Directorate is in appeal before us against the order of the learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court granting anticipatory bail to the respondent invoking jurisdiction under Section 438 of CrPC. From a bare reading of the impugned order it appears that the learned Single Judge is of the view that because the responent was available for interrogation and the prosecution did not avail of that opportunity there should not be any justification for not granting the anticipatory bail sought for. We have no hesitation to hold that the learned Judge has misread the decision of this Court referred to in the impugned order. The critria and questions to be considered for exercising power under Section 438 of CrPC has been recently dealt with in Dukhishyan Benupani, Asstt. Director, Enforcement Directorate (FERA) v. Arun Kumar Bajoria1. The white-collar criminal like the respondent against whom the allegation is that he has violated the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act is a menace to the society and therefore unless he alleges and establishes in the materials that he is being unnecessarily harassed by the investigating agency, the C


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top