Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether bail granted to the accused could be cancelled under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on the ground of multiple pending criminal cases and alleged suppression of antecedents.
Analysis: Cancellation of bail under Section 439(2) requires more than the mere existence of pending cases. The Court noted that the accused had not been convicted in any other matter, had been enlarged on bail in the pending cases, and there was no material showing violation of bail conditions or interference with the trial. The Court distinguished cases where cancellation was justified on account of grave antecedents or misuse of liberty, and held that pending cases by themselves do not establish that the accused is a habitual offender for the purpose of cancelling bail.
Conclusion: Bail could not be cancelled on the facts presented, as no cogent material showed breach of conditions, obstruction of trial, or other exceptional grounds warranting interference under Section 439(2).
Final Conclusion: The petition for cancellation of bail was rejected, and the earlier bail order was left undisturbed.
Ratio Decidendi: Mere pendency of criminal cases, without proof of conviction, breach of bail conditions, or interference with the trial, is insufficient to justify cancellation of bail under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.