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.
No comments:
Post a Comment