Supreme Court of India
Gurdev Singh And Anr. vs State Of Bihar And Anr. on 13 March, 2000
Equivalent citations: 2000(2)ALD(CRI)819, 2000(3)BLJR2270, 2000CRILJ4686, 2000(4)CTC686, JT2000(7)SC447, (2005)13SCC286, AIR 2000 SUPREME COURT 3556(1), 2001 (9) SCC 313, 2000 AIR SCW 3478, 2000 AIR SCW 34782, 2000 AIR SCW 3478.1, 2000 CRI. L. J. 4686, 2005 (13) SCC 286, 2006 (2) SCC (CRI) 177, (2000) 7 JT 414 (SC), 2000 (7) JT 414, 2000 (3) BLJR 2270, 2000 BLJR 3 2270, (2000) 7 JT 447 (SC), (2000) SC CR R 871, (2001) 123 STC 415, (2001) 1 KANTLJ(TRIB) 438, (2000) 6 SUPREME 357, (2000) 3 EASTCRIC 795, (2000) 19 OCR 642, (2001) 1 RECCRIR 290, (2000) 6 SUPREME 549, (2001) 1 BLJ 752, (2000) 3 ALLCRILR 208, (2000) 4 CRIMES 103
Author: U.C. Banerjee
Bench: U.C. Banerjee
ORDER
1. Petitioners are the accused who are aggrieved by the order of cancellation of their bail, on the ground that even before cancellation of bail, no notice was served upon them.
2. Mr. Singh, learned Counsel appearing for the State of Bihar, says that no doubt the Process Server has indicated that there has been service of notice inasmuch as the accused-persons refused to accept the same. But, that report cannot be sacrosanct, and the accused is entitled to hearing before the bail is cancelled.
3. In the facts and circumstances, it would be just and proper to direct the High Court for reconsideration of the matter. Since the accused are already before us through counsel, no notice need be served upon them. They shall appear before the High Court on 3rd April, 2000 on which date the High Court shall fix further date of hearing and pass appropriate orders. We accordingly set aside the impugned order and dispose of this petition accordingly.