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

1976 Supreme(MP) 101

K.K.DUBE
Dashrath – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For Applicant: S.C. Dutta.
For State: Dilip Naik.

ORDER

K.K. DUBE, J.

1. The applicants seek to challenge the order canceling their bail by the Magistrate.

2. The facts briefly stated leading to this application are these:–

The applicants were arrested by the police pending investigation of offences punishable under section 394, 397 and 363 of the Indian Penal Code. The challan could not be filed within a period of sixty days of their arrest and the Sessions Judge granted bail under the proviso to section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Later, the charge-sheets were filed alleging commission of offences under sections 394, 397 and 363 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Magistrate committed the case for trial to the Court of Session as, in his opinion, the evidence taken by the investigating agency disclosed prima facie that the applicants have committed offences which were punishable by life imprisonment and were exclusively triable by the Court of Session. He also cancelled the bail granted earlier. The applicants then moved the Court or Sessions, Rewa but without any success. Hence this application.

3. It is contended that when under section 167(2) bails was granted, it would be deemed to be under Chapter XXXIII of the C


















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