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

1990 Supreme(MP) 375

K.K.VERMA
Premabai – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
V.K. Saxena for applicants; C.S. Dixit, Deputy Government Advocate for State.

ORDER

K.K. Varma, J. -- 1. Applicants by Shri V.K. Saxena, Advocate.

2. State by Shri C.S. Dixit, Dy. Government Advocate.

3. The lerned Sessions Judge, Guna, erred in thinking that he had no jurisdiction or power to consider the applicants' application under section 438(1) CrPC.

4. The present applicants apprehend their arrest in Criminal Original Case No. 480/90, registered on a police report before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Guna, under section 498-A IPC and sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Act. The offence punishable under section 498-A is admittedly a non-bailable one. The Magistrate has taken cognizance of the case. It seems that the police described the applicants as absconding accused persons. The Magistrate ordered issue of warrants of arrest. Accordingly, non-bailable warrants of arrest were issued against applicants Prema Bai (aged 65 years), Ragini (aged 32 years), Mandakini (aged 35 years), residents of Dibiapur, District Etawah (V.P.) and against Madhu Gupta (aged 30 years) of Banaras (V.P.).

5. On the aforementioned facts, the learned Sessions Judge had the jurisdiction to consider the bail application and that it is clear that in the event the application had been gran




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