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

1992 Supreme(MP) 801

S.K.CHAWLA
Rajesh – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Non-applicant No.3, Harilal Arora was given anticipatory bail in Crime No. 95/93 for offence under section 394 I.P .C. of Police Station Bahodapur by order dated 27.7.1993 by Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior Shri N.D. Goyal. Aggrieved by the order the complainant has filed the present revision. The impugned order is seen. The alleged incident arose because complainant Rajesh had gone to consume liquor at the wine shop of non-applicant No.3 Harilal Arora. A dispute about price of the liquor consumed by the complainant appears to have taken place, which is said to have culminated in a scuffle in which it is said that the complainant's gold chain and Rs. 350/- were robbed. One of the accused, namely, Rajesh, who is son of Harilal Arora, was given bail by Shri N.D. Goyal by order dated 25.6.1993. Considering the nature and circumstances of the alleged offence and previous bail granted to one accused, it cannot be said that the learned Additional Sessions Judge exercised his discretion improperly by giving anticipatory bail to Harilal Arora by the impugned order. It would have been proper to impose one more condition to the anticipatory bail besides the condition imposed


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