N.L.GANGULY
GULAB – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U P – Respondent
This is 3rd bail application. The second bail application was rejected by me on 13-9-93. I had issued the direction that ". . . . I consider it appropriate that a direction be issued to the Sessions Judge before whom the Sessions trial is pending to conclude the trial within six months from the date of filing of certified copy of the order passed today, by the applicant. The Sessions Judge, shall not grant frivolous adjournment -and the prosecution be directed to proceed with the case without seeking any adjournment. Learned A. G. A. is directed to communicate to the court below and D. G. C. (Crl.), Sonbhadra to take steps and see that the trial is concluded within the stipulated time. "
2. The learned counsel for the applicant admittedly had not filed the order immediately after it was passed by the court. A certified copy of the said order was obtained on 28-10-93 which was not sent to the applicants Pairokar and learned counsel Sri V. C. Katiyar who appears before the court today has shown the certified copy to be present in his file. There is a mention that the Honble Court order was communicated in November, 1993 which is mentioned in the list of the documents
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.