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

2000 Supreme(SC) 20

2000(7) Supreme 543
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K.T. Thomas & M.B. Shah, JJ.
Vivek Kumar -Appellant
versus
State of U.P. -Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 2 of 2000
(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 2894 of 1999
Decided on 4-1-2000

Headnote:Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 -Section 439-Bail-Appellant was in jail from 4.4.98 in offence under Section 394 and 395 r/w 149 IPC-Trial had not commenced-He was entitled to be released on bail despite suppression of certain facts in bail application, lapses done by his counsel. (Para 2)

       

ORDER

Leave granted.

2. We are told that the appellant is in jail from 4.4.98 in connection with offences under Section 394 and 395 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. It is quite a long period that he has been in custody without commencing the trial. There is no need to detain him further in custody and therefore we are inclined to release him on bail notwithstanding the suppression of certain factual position when the bail application was filed. It would not have been done by the appellant. We feel that lapses on the part of the counsel should not in this case be allowed to prejudice the appellant who is languishing is jail.

3. For the aforesaid reason we order that the appellant be released on bail on execution of a bond with two solvent sureties to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh.

4. The Appeal is disposed of.

Appeal allowed.

*************

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 Back to top