Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.46 seconds)
T. Madhusoodan vs The Superintendent Of Police And Anr. on 23 June, 1992 cites

Balchand Jain vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 5 November, 1976

9. Application under Section 438 of the Code is actually made on apprehension of arrest. In other words, it is only the apprehension of arrest which invites exercise of power under Section 438. The direction that may be given on such application is that in the even of his arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail (vide Balchand Jain v. State of M.P., 1976(4) SCC 572 : (1977 Cri LJ 225).
Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 150 - P N Bhagwati - Full Document

Pritam Singh And Anr. vs The State Of Punjab on 4 November, 1955

12. A learned single Judge of the Delhi High Court in Pritam Singh v. State of Punjab, 1980 Cri LJ 1174, and a learned single Judge of the Karnataka High Court in L.R. Naidu v. State of Karnataka, 1984 Cri LJ 757, have followed the Calcutta High Court view in preference to the view of the learned single Judge of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Ravinder Mohan Bakshi's case, 1984 Cri LJ 714.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 324 - Full Document

L.R. Naidu vs State Of Karnataka on 19 October, 1983

12. A learned single Judge of the Delhi High Court in Pritam Singh v. State of Punjab, 1980 Cri LJ 1174, and a learned single Judge of the Karnataka High Court in L.R. Naidu v. State of Karnataka, 1984 Cri LJ 757, have followed the Calcutta High Court view in preference to the view of the learned single Judge of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Ravinder Mohan Bakshi's case, 1984 Cri LJ 714.
Karnataka High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 29 - Full Document
1