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

1976 Supreme(Cal) 112

H.N.SEN, P.C.BOROOAH
BHOLAI MISTRY – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


JUDGEMENT

P. C. Borooah, J. :- The two accused petitioners have obtained this Rule against an order passed by Shri C. Sammadar, Sessions Judge, Nadia on February 10, 1976 rejecting their application for bail.

2. Both the petitioners were granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by this Bench on September 13, 1975. On February 3, 1976 when the second petitioner attended Ranaghat court in connection with the pending case he was taken into custody as on that date the learned Magistrate committed both the petitioners to the Court of Session for being tried under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code. Thereafter an application for bail moved before the learned Sessions Judge, Nadia was dismissed by him on February 10, 1976 and the first petitioner thereafter surrendered in court on February 11, 1976.

3. When committing an accused to a court of session the learned Magistrate can remand him to custody during or until the conclusion of the trial but subject to the provisions of the Code relating to bail. This is laid down in Section 209, sub-section (b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Bail granted by the High Court under Section 438 of the Code of



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