2000 (3) Crimes 388
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Dr. Maithli Sharan. J.
Ram Kumar @ Raj Kumar Rathore- Petitioner
versus
State of M.P. -Respondent
Misc. Cri. Case No. 3320 of 1999
Decided on 8-2-2000
Counsel for the parties:
For the Petitioner: Mr. A.K. Shrivastava,
Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. S.M.A. Naghi, Dy. Govt. Advocate.

IMPORTANT POINT
Provision of Section 437(6) Cr. P.C. is mandatory.

Headnote:Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 437(6) - Petitioner facing trial for offences under Sections 420, 120-B, 467 and 468 IPC - 60 days period completed since evidence started in pial and petitioner was in custody - Application for ball Provision is mandatory in nature - Reasons given by Courts below In dismissing bail application that petitioner would not be attending trial could not be termed Judicious to thwart and wash off the mandatory nature of Section 437(6) Cr. P.C. Petitioner held entitled to ball.(Para 5)

       Result: Petition allowed.