Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 439(2)
Judgment
Mr. Imtiaz Ahmed Ms. Ghazala Firdaus Mr. Sk. Saidullah Mr. Mithun Mondal Mr. Md. Arsalan Mr. Zohaib Rauf Mr. Daanish Haque Mr. Rahul Chachan Mr. Binay Kr. Panda Ms. Puspita Saha …for the petitioner ... for the de facto complainant ... for the State The petitioner contended that the opposite party no.1 had not complied with the condition of bail i.e. to meet investigating officer once a week. Learned lawyer for the State and the de facto complainant submits that charge-sheet has been filed. Although we do not appreciate the conduct of the opposite in not complying with the condition to meet the investigating officer once a week, but in view of the subsequent development i.e. completion of investigation, we are of the view that no worthwhile purpose would be served in cancelling the bail on this score. (Gaurang Kanth, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.