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

1991 Supreme(All) 733

V.N.MEHROTRA
SHOBHA RAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
P.L.SAWHNEY, R.N.SHARMA

V. N. MEHROTRA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a second bail application moved by Applicant Shobha Ram in a case under Ss. 302/ 307/ 452, I. P. C. The first bail application which was moved by the present applicant and one Kishan Pal was rejected by me on merits on 11-3-1991.

( 2 ) THE present bail application has been moved on the ground that after the rejection of first bail application moved by the applicant, bail has been granted to co-accused Chandra Pal by Honble Mr. Justice N. L. Ganguli on 20-7-1991. It is argued that the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused Chandra Pal and on the ground of parity, the applicant should also be granted bail.

( 3 ) ON behalf of the complainant as well as the State, it has been asserted that after the rejection of the first bail application moved by the present applicant, one application by another co-accused was rejected by Honble Mr. Justice K. K. Chaubey and this fact was not brought to the notice of Honble Mr. Justice N. L. Ganguli when the bail application of co-accused Chandra Pal was allowed. It is contended that in such circumstances, the ground of parity will not be available to the present applicant. On behalf of the










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