https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301041 The judgment highlighted the irregularity of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate interfering with a bail order issued by a Metropolitan Magistrate, emphasizing the need for judicial propriety. It clarified that while the Criminal Procedure Code does not explicitly grant Magistrates the power to stay bail orders, such authority can be implied under certain provisions to ensure effective administration of justice. The court partly allowed the application, directing the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate not to proceed further and referring the matter to the Chief Justice, while rejecting other prayers. en-us Wed, 22 Sep 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Mar 2022 14:08:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301041 The judgment highlighted the irregularity of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate interfering with a bail order issued by a Metropolitan Magistrate, emphasizing the need for judicial propriety. It clarified that while the Criminal Procedure Code does not explicitly grant Magistrates the power to stay bail orders, such authority can be implied under certain provisions to ensure effective administration of justice. The court partly allowed the application, directing the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate not to proceed further and referring the matter to the Chief Justice, while rejecting other prayers. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 22 Sep 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301041