Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.21 seconds)
Ashit Ghosh And Ors. vs State Of West Bengal on 11 December, 1996 cites

Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia Etc vs State Of Punjab on 9 April, 1980

Mr. Roy has not argued in the least that the Court is stripped off power to impose conditions in granting an anticipatory bail which can be aided by the provisions of Section 437 of the Cr.P.C. The judgment under criticism can neither acquire any legal force nor any persuasive value to become binding Upon all the Courts of our country, in particular, the apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh v. State, (1980 Cri LJ 1125) (supra) tangentially discussed the point which has not been disturbed, modified, analysed and distinguished by any subsequent decision of the apex Court of our country.
Supreme Court of India Cites 19 - Cited by 8067 - Y V Chandrachud - Full Document

Bimal Adak And Ors. vs State on 8 October, 1996

2. The twin question that showed its head in the decision under criticism is whether anticipatory bail could be granted in a non-bailable offence after submission of charge-sheet while the other dealt with the permissibility fixation of outer limit in granting anticipatory bail. So far as the former is concerned, we have answered the issue in detail, since we have copiously dealt with it in Bimal Adak v. State where a batch of applications was dismissed on merit, by our order dated 8-10-1996. Therefore, we safely keep ourself away from the former question, since answered by us in the negative. Anticipatory bail is a shield against arrest erupting from reasons to believe. It is a social lubricant available to a petitioner to protect him from ignominy, harassment and vexatious allegation.
Calcutta High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1