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

1998 Supreme(P&H) 1126

S.C.MALTE
Ramesh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Ms. Lisa Gill, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Gobind Dhanda, AAG, Haryana.

ORDER

S.C. Malte, J. - The petitioner seeks bail under Section 167(2) Criminal Procedure Code on the ground that even after the conclusion of 90th day of since his arrest, challan was not presented to the Court. The admitted position is that soon after the conclusion of 90th day, the petitioner submitted an application for release on bail. The trial Court issued notice to the prosecution. During the pendency of that petition, charge-sheet was submitted. The short question, therefore, would be whether the petitioner would be entitled to get the benefit of 167(2) Criminal Procedure Code in such situation.

2. The trial Court has relied on certain rulings and observed that if the challan is submitted before the accused is released on bail, he cannot be granted bail under Section 167(2) Criminal Procedure Code

3. Counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, relied on the case of Dr. Bipin Shantilal Panchal v. State of Gujarat, 1996(1) Recent CR 506. In that case Their Lordships of the Supreme Court have made an observation that if an accused person fails to exercise his right to be released on bail for the failure of the prosecution to file the charge sheet within the time limit, he ge



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