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

1965 Supreme(AP) 35

In Re: Saradamma – Appellant
Versus
. – Respondent


VENKATASWAMI, J.

( 1 ) CRL. M. P. No. 189 of 1965 was filed by Saradamma the 5th accused in P. R. C. 27 of 1964 on the file of the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Cuddapah. Crl. M. P. No. 192 of 1965 was filed on behalf of A-2, A-6 and A-7 in the same case. The learned Sessions Judge of Cuddapah granted bail to all these accused on condition that they should confine their movements to the municipal limits of the Cuddapah town during the pendency of the sessions case and report themselves to the police station twice every day. These petitions are filed contending that the order imposing those conditions is illegal.

( 2 ) IN order to appreciate the contention advanced, a few facts may be stated. These petitioners and three others were charged under Ss. 120-B, 420, 468 and 471 I. P. C. Accused 3 and 9 are not yet apprehended. The first accused had not applied for bail at all. The present petitioners were granted bail subject to the conditions aforesaid.

( 3 ) THE contention of Mr. Hasan, the learned counsel on behalf of the petitioners is that a Court has no power under S. 497, Cr. P. C. to impose conditions other than those provided for in S. 499, viz. , fixing a sum of money with 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