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

1995 Supreme(SC) 1310

SUHAS C. SEN, K. S. PARIPOORNAN, A. M. AHMADI
Salauddin Abdulsamad Shaikh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent


ORDER

The petitioner filed an application in the High Court being Criminal Application No. 2230/95 under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and secured and ad-interim anticipatory bail order which was to enure upto 26.9.1995. The High Court imposed certain conditions, one of which was that he will report at the Police Station every day till 25.9.1995. The petitioner says that he has complied with each and every condition imposed under that order. Be that as it may, it was an ad-interim order which was to enure upto 26.9.1995. When the matter came up on that day for final disposal before the same learned Judge, he directed the petitioner to move a regular bail application before the Court which was in seisin of the criminal case pending against him and observed that the bail application should be disposed of uninfluenced by the observations made in the earlier order of 13.9.1995. It is against this order passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court that this SLP is filed. We see no reason to entertain this petition. Under Section 490 of the Code of Criminal Procedure when any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed





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