Sikkim High Court
BAIL APPLN./1/2010 of Dawa Tshering Lepcha Vs State Of Sikkim on 15 March 2010
COURT OF SIKKIM CRIMINAL JUFIISDICTION BAIL APPI-. No ........................... 9± ........................................ of 20...:.9 mwA TSHERING IEpcFB STATE 0F SIKKIM Appellant Petitioner (Advocate (s)) Pespondent Opposite Party (Advocate (s)) For For Versus MR. zaNGpO SRERPA AND
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
2
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM
CRIMINAL JUFIISDICTION
SGPG-2/ Hlgh Courv 2000 Nos/ 2.4.2009
Case No
Order (s) with Signature (s)was arrested by the police from t:he Sadar P.S. inconnection with Sadar P.S.Case No. 106(12)09 dat:ed20.12.2009 under Sections 120(b), 201, 302 IPC on23.12.2009.2 Mr. Zangpo Sherpa, Advocate assisted by Mr. PemTshering Lepcha, Advocat:e appearing on behalf of theaccused/petitioner submit:s t:hat there are .no materialsagainst the accused/petitioner t:o be charged for theoffences alleged against him and that even assuming thatthere are mat:erials against the petit:ioner, it waspermissible in law t:o enlarge him on bail if it appears inthe circumstances of the case that: he shall not abscondor tamper with the evidence. The learned counselassures this Court that the petitioner shall face the trialand for that purpose he is ready to produce a localsurety. It is his submission that this Court has the powerunder Section 439 Cr.P.C. being quite distinct from thepowers under Section 437 by which this Court wieldswider discret:ions and that the Court can exercise andought to exercise such discretion also on the principles ofequity for the reason that the principal accused Smt.Passangkit Lepcha, has already been released on bail.The learned Counsel for the accused/petitioner has placedin support of his submissions the following decisions: -(2005) 2 SCC 13 - Jayendra SaraswathiSwamigal vs. State of T.N.2.AIR 1994 Supreme Court 373 - 1984Crl.L.J.160 - Bhagirathsinh Judeja vs. Stateof Gujarat(2009)5 SCC 283 - Izharul Haq Hamid Shaikh& Another vs. State of Gujarat SGPG- 3/ High Courv 500o Nos./ 2.4.2009
is
carseNo.f?.#....
SGPG- 3/ High Courv §000Nos./ 2.4.2009
0
SGPG- 3/ High Courv 5000 Nos/2.4.2009