SHIV KUMAR SHARMA, K.S.RATHORE, KHEM CHAND SHARMA
Ganesh Raj – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
``Whether second or subsequent bail application under section 438 Cr.P.C. is maintainable or not?
(2). In our endeavour to answer the question, we may begin with noticing that provision of Anticipatory bail was introduced for the first time in the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 Under the old Code 1898 there was no such provision. There were conflicting decisions of the High Court. Some of the High Courts took the view that bail could be granted to a person against whom a report of an offence was made even though he was neither arrested nor detained and even in a case where a person was suspected of an offence for which he might be arrested by a police officer but the majority of the High Court held that not to speak of Sessions Judge even High Court did not have inherent power to grant anticipatory bail by invoking 561A of the old Code. However Law Commission in the 41st report advocated the granting of power of anticipatory bail to ``Superior Courts. In its 48th report the Law Commission again endorsed the view expressed in the 41st report and clause 447 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Bil
1. Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia vs. State of Punjab ((1980) 2 SCC 565)
2. Suresh Chand vs. State of Rajasthan (2001(2) RLR 757)
9. Nahar Singh vs. State of Raj. (1983 RLR 88)
20. Easland Combines Coimbatore vs. Collector of Central Excise ((2003) 3 SCC 410)
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.