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

1984 Supreme(Ori) 200

R.C.PATNAIK, D.P.MOHAPATRA
N. SUREYA REDDY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
U.C.Panda

D. P. MOHAPATRA,J.

( 1 ) THOUGH the application under Section 439 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was filed by N. Sureya Reddy and N. Pandeyaa alias Pandeyya Reddy for being enlarged on bail, at the time of argument the learned counsel pressed the application for petitioner No. 1, N. Sureya Reddy alone. The sole ground on which the application is filed is that the investigating agency having failed to file the charge-sheet within a period of 90 days from the date of arrest of the petitioners, they are entitled to be released on bail as provided under Section 167 (2) proviso (a) (i), Cr. P. C.

( 2 ) THE admitted factual position is that the petitioner was arrested by the police on 8-5-1984 in connection with Chatrapur P. S. Case No. 99 of 1984 which is now pending before the Court of Session, Berhampur, in S. C. No. 155 of 1984. The charge-sheet was submitted on 6-8-1984, i. e. on the 91st day of arrest. The 90th day from the date of arrest fell on 5-8-1984, a sunday. While the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the provisions u/s. 167 (2) proviso (a) (i) have been infringed in the case, the learned Additional Government Advocate contends that




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