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

2021 Supreme(MP) 589

VIVEK AGARWAL
Prachi – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
K.K. Pandey for applicant; Vishal Daniel for respondents No. 2 to 5.

ORDER

1. This M.Cr.C. under section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking cancellation of bail order dated 16.12.2020 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Lakhnadon District- Seoni (M.P.).

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant had moved an application to the Superintendent of Police and SHO Police Station Aadegaon, Tehsil Lakhnadon as is contained in Annexure-A/8 reporting that after being released on bail, non-applicants are threatening coercing her to take back her cases but no steps have been taken by the Superintendent of Police or the SHO, therefore, this application before the High Court for cancellation of bail.

3. Learned counsel for respondent Shri Vishal Daniel in his turn submits that words used in section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. are High Court or Sessions Court and applicant should have in the first instance approached the Sessions Court instead of directly approaching the High Court.

4. It is also submitted that Annexure A/8, does not contain signatures of the applicant and it appears to have been prepared as an after thought in as much as, though date of complaint is mentioned as 4.1.2021 but the postal receipt reveals that it was di

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