9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (2) TMI 929X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dhanshu Nath Singh, Madhusmita Bora, S.R. Sharma and Saurabh, Advs For the Respondents/Defendant: R.G. Padia and Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Advs., Irshad Ahmad, R.K.S. Yadav, Shushil Mishra, Lalit Srivastava and K.K. Mohan, Advs. JUDGMENT K.G. Balakrishnan, C.J. 1. Leave granted. 2. The appellant is an accused in Crime No. 311/2002 registered for the offences under Sections 302 and 395 read ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... round to urge for bail as there was no change in circumstances. It was also pointed out that whatever grounds urged in the second bail application could have been stated in the first bail application and the reasons given for grant of bail by the Sessions Judge in the second bail application were in utter violation of the settled principles of judicial propriety. We have heard the learned Couns ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cy when they were found baseless. The list of cases has been furnished by the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant also pointed out that even against the second respondent several cases are pending and he had no right to move for cancellation of the bail granted to the appellant. 5. When the matter was pending before us, we repeat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
