In an anticipatory bail application, the Single Judge declined to extend bail due to the serious nature of offences under the IPC and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, but permitted the parties to approach trial courts with guidance for disposal.
Petitioners at liberty to approach trial courts; bail in pending proceedings to be disposed expeditiously.
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.
ABLAPL No.6269 of 2015
20.07.2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
This is an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
The accused-petitioners are alleged to have committed offence punishable under Sections
294/452/323/325/307/506/34, I.P.C. and Section 3 of the S.C. and S.T. (P.A.) Act.
Considering the alleged nature of offences, I am not inclined to extend the benefit of a
nticipatory bail.
However, the petitioners are at liberty to approach the trial courts and in the event of
moving bail application by the petitioners, the learned courts below would do well to dispose
of the same in course of the day.
Necessary cost of transmission of the Case Diary, if required, shall be borne by the pet
itioners.
The ABLAPL is accordingly disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail is to be granted given the nature of offences invoked.
Whether the petitioners are directed to approach the trial courts for bail.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court