already availed of' used by this
Court in Sanjay Dutt's case (supra) must be understood to mean
when the accused files ... expression “if not
already availed of” used by this Court in Sanjay Dutt (supra) must
be understood to mean “when the accused files an application
meaning of " if not already availed of " in Sanjay Dutt
12. One of the relevant decisions dealing with the question of accrual ... referred to a Constitution Bench of this Court in
Sanjay Dutt (supra). Reservation was expressed before this Court
that the decision in Hitendra Vishnu Thakur
period. Placing reliance on a judgment
of this Court in Sanjay Dutt v. State2, Mr. Chaudhri argued
that the maximum period of detention that ... Sheikh & Ors. v. State of
Maharashtra3 explained the judgment in Sanjay Dutt
(supra) and held that the right under Section 167(2) , CrPC
cannot
State of Maharashtra (2011) 10SCC 445 and Constitution Bench Judgment in Sanjay Dutt's case by learned Magistrate for rejecting the application for default ... Singh Thakur 's case (Supra) and Constitution Bench Judgment of Sanjay Dutt's case. No jurisdictional error has been committed by the learned
been
taken before the expiry of 60 days.
11.. . . . In Sanjay Dutt (supra), this Court held that the
indefeasible right accruing to the accused ... been taken. . . .
15. A close scrutiny of the judgments in Sanjay Dutt (supra),
Madar Sheikh (supra) and M. Ravindran (supra) would show
that there
rendered by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in case of Sanjay Dutt Vs. State
Through C.B.I. Bombay, reported ... also contended
at this stage that while considering the case of
Sanjay Dutt (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has
also taken into consideration
Maharashtra , (1994) 4 SCC 602 : 1994 SCC
(Cri) 1087] and Sanjay Dutt [Sanjay
- 11 -
WP No. 12843 of 2022
Dutt v. State ... been filed by the
appellants. Hence the Court held, relying
upon Sanjay Dutt [Sanjay Dutt v. State
original and supplied)
This was affirmed by the Constitution Bench in Sanjay Dutt,
wherein it was held that the grant of default bail is subject ... made. This seems to have given rise to the misconception that
Sanjay Dutt endorses the view that the prosecution may seek
extension of time
case [(1975) 2 SCC 220 :
1975 SCC (Cri) 484] and in Sanjay Dutt case [(1994)
5 SCC 410 : 1994 SCC (Cri) 1433] were instances
where ... Iqbal Madar Sheikh v. State of
Maharashtra, (1996) 1 SCC 722, Sanjay Dutt v. State, ( 1994) 5 SCC 410,
and M. Ravindran v. Intelligence Officer
witnessed by two attesting
witnesses namely Sh. Naresh Kohli and Sh. Sanjay Dutt.
4.3 The Testator passed away on 11th February, 2014.
4.4 The Testator ... Badal Kumar (PW-3), Mr. Ram Mohan Shukla (PW-4)
and Sanjay Dutt (PW-5) were examined on behalf of the Petitioner. The
aforesaid witnesses
