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

1984 Supreme(SC) 168

E.S.VENKATARAMIAH
Keshab Narayan Banerjee – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


ORDER

(1) SPECIAL Leave granted. Mr. Goburdhan takes notice on behalf of the State of Bihar.

(2) HEARD counsel for the parties. The condition imposed by the High court for enlarging Keshab Narayan Banerjee, appellant No. 1 on bail, namely, that he should, furnish security for rupees one lakh in cash or in fixed deposit of any nationalised bank in Bihar with two sureties residing in the State of Bihar each for a like amount appears to be excessively onerous. In the circumstances of this case, it virtually amounts to denial of bail itself. It is, therefore, ordered that appellant No. 1 shall be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a bail bond for Rs. 25,000.00 with two sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge. The learned Special Judge need not insist that the appellants should produce sureties who are residing in Bihar only. The order of the High court shall stand modified accordingly.

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