Friday, 25 December 2020

Supreme court: No blanket bar to grant Anticipatory bail to accused in offences under Mines Act

We may not agree with the broad sweep of the

observations in para 27 of the relied upon judgment

in the impugned order, i.e, Bala @ Balasubramani vs.

State in Crl.OP No. 13334 of 2020 and connected

matters, decided on 03.09.2020 as in consideration of

anticipatory bail the role assigned to a person would

have to be considered. However, looking to the FIR

and the nature of the allegations against the

petitioner, we are of the view that the petitioner

must surrender and apply for regular bail which

should be considered as expeditiously as possible.


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). 6029/2020

S. MOHAMED SHAHUL HAMEED Vs STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE 

Date : 11-12-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY


UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

We may not agree with the broad sweep of the

observations in para 27 of the relied upon judgment

in the impugned order, i.e, Bala @ Balasubramani vs.

State in Crl.OP No. 13334 of 2020 and connected

matters, decided on 03.09.2020 as in consideration of

anticipatory bail the role assigned to a person would

have to be considered. However, looking to the FIR

and the nature of the allegations against the

petitioner, we are of the view that the petitioner

must surrender and apply for regular bail which

should be considered as expeditiously as possible.

The petitioner is granted two weeks’ time to

surrender before the competent Court.

The special leave petition is dismissed with

the aforesaid observations.

Pending applications stand disposed of.


Print Page

No comments:

Post a comment