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

1989 Supreme(Del) 97

P.K.BAHRI
VINAY CHOUDHARY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF DELHI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.K.BAKSHI, P.N.CHAUDHURY, P.P.GROVER

P. K. BAHRI, J

( 1 ) THE petitioner who has been chalaned for an offence under Sections 302, 307 and 436, Indian Penal Code (for short Indian Penal Code ") and Section 27 of the Arms Art. has come up and filed this petition seeking bail.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is stated to have killed a young college, girl who had allegedly refused to marry the petitioner by shooting her from very close quarter on her temple. On merits, even the learned counsel for the petitioner has nothing to say as far as the bail petitioner is concerned. However, counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the investigation had not been completed by the police within 90 days and incomplete challan had been filed on December 4, 1988 and thus, under Section 167 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short cr. P. C ) the petitioner has become entitled to bail.

( 3 ) I have gone through the record of the case and find wsi on December 4, 1988, which was a Sunday, the challan was put in before the Duty Magistrate and it was recorded by the Duty Magistrate in his order that he accepted the challan and he directed the Ahlmad to check the same and put it before the concerned Metropolitan Magistrate on the f







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