Accused A1 and A4 sought anticipatory bail for the third time after earlier applications were dismissed. The court found no change in circumstances and dismissed the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl.O.P.No.6380 of 2024
Crl.O.P.No.6380 of 2024
RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN, J.
The brief facts of the case is that the first anticipatory bail application filed by the accused A1 to A5 in Crl.O.P.No.19556 of 2023 came to be disposed of by this Court, by an order dated 15.09.2003. By that order while the accused A2 and A3, who were females granted anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail application filed by the accused A1, A4 and A5 was dismissed.
earlier anticipatory bail application was dismissed by this Court, by an administrative order, this case is posted today before this Court.
namely A4 and A5, there is no specific overt act against them in the complaint.
1/3
Crl.O.P.No.6380 of 2024
5.
defacto complainant was arrested and remanded to judicial custody and after more than 55 days, he was granted bail and the matter is under investigation.
27.03.2024
dpa
2/3
Crl.O.P.No.6380 of 2024
RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN, J.
dpa
Crl.O.P.No.6380 of 2024
27.03.2024
3/3
A1
A4
RMT. Teekaa Raman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
