Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 3]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

The State Nct Of Delhi vs Shiv Kumar Gupta on 16 November, 2015

<%     ITEM NO.22                               COURT NO.4                        SECTION IIA
                                    S U P R E M E C O U R T O F             I N D I A
                                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

     Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 8108/2015
     (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 09/07/2015
     in BA No. 3835/2015 passed by the High Court Of Jharkhand At
     Ranchi)

     VASIMUDDIN @ MOHAMMAD VASIMUDDIN                                                 Petitioner(
s)
                                      VERSUS
     THE STATE OF JHARKHAND                                                           Respondent(
s)
     (with interim relief and office report)

     Date : 16/11/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :
                              HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR
                              HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI

     For Petitioner(s)                    Mr.   Praveen Swarup,Adv.
                                          Mr.   R.K. Singh, Adv.
                                          Ms.   Sushma Verma, Adv.
                                          Mr.   Lokendra Kumar, Adv.
                                          Mr.   Mohd. Nasim, Adv.

     For Respondent(s)                    Mr. Tapesh Kumar Singh,Adv.
                                          Mr. Mohd. Waquas, Adv.

                               UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                                  O R D E R

We have heard learned counsel for the rival parties.

The petitioner in this case was the father-in-law of the deceased. He has been declined the concession of bail, even though the two brothers-in-law of the deceased were admitted to such concession. It is not a matter of dispute, that the husband of the deceased is in custody, and has been declined bail.

In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we are satisfied, that the petitioner deserves the concession of bail. Ordered accordingly. Bail on such terms as may be deemed appropriate by the learned trial Judge.

Signature Not Verified

Disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Digitally signed by
Parveen Kumar Chawla
Date: 2015.11.16
18:06:30 IST
Reason:
     (Renuka Sadana)                                                (Parveen Kr. Chawla)
      Court Master                                                       AR-cum-PS
ITEM NO.22/1                   COURT NO.4                    SECTION IIA
                   S U P R E M E C O U R T O F         I N D I A
                           RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 8116/2015 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 03/07/2015 in BA No. 1738/2015 passed by the High Court Of Jharkhand At Ranchi) SAHIBA BANO Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondent(s) (with interim relief and office report) Date : 16/11/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Praveen Swarup,Adv.
Mr. R.K. Singh, Adv.
Ms. Sushma Verma, Adv.
Mr. Lokendra Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Mohd. Nasim, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Tapesh Kumar Singh,Adv.
Mr. Mohd. Waquas, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R We have heard learned counsel for the rival parties.
The petitioner in this case was the mother-in-law of the deceased. She has been declined the concession of bail, even though the two brothers-in-law of the deceased were admitted to such concession. It is not a matter of dispute, that the husband of the deceased is in custody, and has been declined bail.
In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we are satisfied, that the petitioner deserves the concession of bail. Ordered accordingly. Bail on such terms as may be deemed appropriate by the learned trial Judge.
Disposed of in the aforesaid terms.


(Renuka Sadana)                                 (Parveen Kr. Chawla)
 Court Master                                        AR-cum-PS