http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 1 of 8

CASE NO.:

Appeal (crl.) 394 of 2001

PETITIONER:

UDAY MOHANLAL ACHARYA

Vs.

RESPONDENT:

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 29/03/2001

BENCH:

B.N. Agrawal

JUDGMENT:

L...I...T.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T..J

JUDGMENT

B.N. AGRAWAL,J.

I have perused the judgment of my learned Brother

Pattanaik,J., for whom I have the highest regard and while

agreeing with him with respect to conclusion nos. 1 to 5, I

find myself unable to agree on conclusion no. 6, enumerated

hereunder, upon which alone decision of this appeal is

dependent, and observations and direction connected

therewith:-

The expression ‘if not already availed of used by

this Court in Sanjay Dutt vs. State through CBI Bombay(II),

(1994) 5 SCC 410, must be understood to mean when the

accused files an application and is prepared to offer bail

on being directed. In other words, on expiry of the period

specified in paragraph (a) of proviso to sub-section (2) of

Section 167 if the accused files an application for bail and

offers also to furnish the bail, on being directed, then it

has to