https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427988 An application seeking cancellation of bail was treated as maintainable under Section 437(2) CrPC despite a typographical error in the provision cited, because the court granting bail has competence to cancel it. The accused's failure to join investigation in response to summons and failure to share location as required by the bail order were held to be breaches of express bail conditions. Jurisdictional objections and silence on the summons did not excuse non-compliance when the summons themselves had not been challenged. Bail was cancelled, the bail bond was forfeited, and coercive steps including a non-bailable warrant and notice to the surety were directed. en-us Tue, 13 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Apr 2025 13:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427988 An application seeking cancellation of bail was treated as maintainable under Section 437(2) CrPC despite a typographical error in the provision cited, because the court granting bail has competence to cancel it. The accused's failure to join investigation in response to summons and failure to share location as required by the bail order were held to be breaches of express bail conditions. Jurisdictional objections and silence on the summons did not excuse non-compliance when the summons themselves had not been challenged. Bail was cancelled, the bail bond was forfeited, and coercive steps including a non-bailable warrant and notice to the surety were directed. Case-Laws GST Tue, 13 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427988