REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Arnab Manoranjan Goswami Appellant

V/S

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment has been divided into sections to facilitate analysis. They are:

(2.) Pending the disposal of the petition, by an interim application in the proceedings[3], the appellant sought his release from custody and a stay of all further proceedings including the investigation in pursuance of the FIR.

(3.) A Division Bench of the High Court, by its order dated 9 November 2020, noted that prayer (a) by which a writ of habeas corpus was sought was not pressed. The High Court posted the hearing of the petition for considering the prayer for quashing of the FIR on 10 December 2020. It declined to accede to the prayer for the grant of bail, placing reliance on a decision of this Court in State of Telangana vs. Habib Abdullah Jeelani, (2017) 2 SCC 779 ('Habib Jeelani"). The High Court was of the view that the prayers for interim relief proceeded on the premise that the appellant had been illegally detained and since he was in judicial custody, it would not entertain the request for bail or for stay of the investigation in the exercise of its extra-ordinary jurisdiction. The High Court held that since the appellant was in judicial custody, it was open to him to avail of the remedy of bail under Section 439 of the CrPC. The High Court declined prima facie to consider the submission of the appellant that the allegations in the FIR, read as they stand, do not disclose the commission of an offence under Section 306 of the I PC. That is how the case has come to this Court. The appellant is aggrieved by the denial of his interim prayer for the grant of bail.

Click here to view full judgment.

ARNAB MANORANJAN GOSWAMI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address