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

2025 Supreme(SC) 381

B. R. GAVAI, K. VINOD CHANDRAN
Shekhar Prasad Mahto – Appellant
Versus
Registrar General, Jharkhand High Court – Respondent


ORDER :

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in defiance of the orders passed by this Court on 31.07.2023 in SLP(Crl.) No. 7203 of 2003 and on 12.12.2023 in SLP(Crl.) No. 15585 of 2023, the matters pertaining to the same FIR were not placed before the same learned Judge.

2. It is submitted that this Court in unequivocal terms has directed that all the matters arising out of the same FIR should be placed before the same learned Judge.

3. It is, however, submitted that in the present case though Judge ‘A’ had passed an order in the bail application preferred by a co-accused, the application for bail preferred by the petitioner was placed before Judge ‘B’.

4. The three judges-Bench of this Court in SLP(Crl) No. 7203 of 2023 has observed thus:

    “7. We have come across various matters from the High Court of Allahabad, wherein matters arising out of the same FIR are placed before different Judges. This leads to anomalous situation. Inasmuch as some of the learned Judges grant bail and some other Judges refuse to grant bail, even when the role attributed to the applicants is almost similar.”

5. The said observations have been reiterated by a two- Judge Bench of this Court in SLP(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