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

2001 Supreme(SC) 1433

G.B.PATTANAIK, S.N.VARIAVA, UMESH C.BANERJEE
Narinderjit Singh Sahni – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Banerjee, J.-This batch of writ petitions under Article 32 of Constitution by reason of supposed infraction of Article 21, moved before this Court for the grant of an order for bail in nature as prescribed under Section 438 Cr.P. Code, and in line with the orders dated 28.3.2000 in W.P. (Crl.) No.256 of 1999 and dated 5.5.2000 in W.P. (Crl.) Nos 72-75 of 2000 passed earlier by this Court. To crystalize the issue, the orders as passed earlier ought to be noticed at this juncture. The first of the two orders read as below: (JVO Group of Companies : Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 256 of 1999)

It is not possible for us to order that all his cases pending in different States should be consolidated into one and brought before one court. That would impose unwarranted and unnecessary hardships on the witnesses and investigating agency spread over to those different States. Nor are we inclined to order the Central Bureau of Investigation to take up the investigation in respect of all cases., and further that he would make himself available on any date when his presence is imperatively needed in that court.

3. We permit the petitioner to move the appropriate High Courts for bringing all t

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