Interim protection and appearance bonds clarified as the Court applies an earlier precedent and leaves procedural direction open.

An interim order was continued on the same terms because the matter was treated as covered by an earlier decision of the Court, and the appeal was allowed. The Court also clarified that a Special Court may require the appellant to furnish bonds for appearance under the relevant criminal procedure provision, leaving that direction to be made in accordance with law. The operative effect was that the interim protection became absolute, while the appearance-bond question remained open for the Special Court to address within the applicable procedural framework.

---

---

Issues: Whether the interim order was liable to be made absolute and the appeal allowed in view of the earlier decision of the Court, and whether the Special Court could direct furnishing of bonds for appearance.

Analysis: The matter was treated as covered by an earlier decision of the Court, and the interim order was continued on the same terms and conditions. The Court also clarified that the Special Court may require the appellant to furnish bonds for appearance in accordance with the relevant criminal procedure provision.

Conclusion: The interim order was made absolute and the appeal was allowed. The direction regarding appearance bonds was left open to be passed by the Special Court in accordance with law.

---