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

1990 Supreme(Cal) 390

A.K.BHATTACHARYA, SHAMSUDDIN AHMED
MD. ABDUL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF WEST BENGAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.CHAUDHARY, B.C.Roy, H.P.Jaiswal

SHAMSUDDIN AHMED, J, J.


( 1 ) THIS is an application for bail under section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code. An application for bail by the petitioner was filed before the learned Chief Judge, City Sessions Court and was rejected by an order dated 28-5-1990. In the said impugned order the learned Judge held that the provisions of section 167 of the Criminal Procedure Code arc not attracted in a case under the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as NDPS Act) and further held that provisions of section 37 of the NDPS Act have imposed limitations on the court for granting bail and accordingly considering the limitations imposed, the learned Judge was pleased to reject that application.

( 2 ) MR. Jaiswal, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner, has submitted that since the petitioner is being detained in custody for more than ninety days and no charge-sheet has been filed, he is entitled to the benefit of section 167 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Mr. Jaiswal has relied on a decision. In the said decision the Supreme Court had occasion to consider a case if benefits of section 167 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code















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