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

2023 Supreme(MP) 361

VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
Ketan – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Mitesh Jain for appellant; Tarun Pagare, Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.

ORDER

1. The present criminal appeal is filed under section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred as POA Act) r/w section 439 of Cr.P.C.

2. Counsel for the State raised preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the appeal with the contention that the 2nd Criminal Appeal under section 14-A(2) of POA Act once dismissed is not maintainable in view of the judgment passed by Coordinate Bench at Gwalior in Criminal Appeal No. 1502/2023 (Neeraj Verma vs. State of M.P. & Anr.) . He referred the para - 6 & 7 of the said judgment which is reproduced as under :-

6. Once an appeal is dismissed, the appellant would have to approach the Special Court or the Exclusive Special Court afresh for an order of bail. While entertaining such a second application, the learned Court below can pass an order granting bail, if it finds a change in circumstance. The constraint of an order passed by the High Court under 438 or 439 baring the inferior Court from entertaining an application for bail in line with judicial propriety, will not apply in the case of a fresh application under the Special Act. Even though the High Court m

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