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

2004 Supreme(MP) 450

A.K.GOHIL
YUVRAJ GAUD – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.S.Rathore, SUDHA SHRIVASTAVA

A. K. GOHIL, J.

( 1 ) APPLICANT is seeking anticipatory bail under S. 438 of the Code of criminal Procedure, 1973, in a private complaint case No. 40/2003, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, vijaypur, district Sheopure, for the offences under Ss. 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of indian Penal Code. Earlier M. Cr. C. No. 2795/03 was disposed of with a direction to the applicant to appear before the trial court and to furnish bail, as he was summoned through bailable warrant.

( 2 ) THE submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the offence un- under S. 467, I. P. C. though is triable by Magistrate First Class but is a non-cognizable and non-bailable offence and punishment of imprisonment of life or imprisonment of ten years and fine has been prescribed, therefore, the Magistrate First Class is not having jurisdiction to grant the bail in cases where sentence of imprisonment for life has been prescribed for a particular offence and if the applicant will appear even after issue of bailable warrant, he shall be arrested and shall be committed to prison. Additional sessions Judge, Sabalgarh has already rejected his anticipatory bail application.

( 3 )












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