STATE OF WEST BENGAL Vs. NEBULAL SHAW
LAWS(CAL)-1996-12-11
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on December 20,1996

STATE OF WEST BENGAL Appellant
VERSUS
NEBULAL SHAW Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

PRERNA SHARMA VS. STATE OF H.P. [LAWS(HPH)-2017-6-14] [REFERRED TO]
PRERNA SHARMA VS. STATE OF H P AND ANOTHER [LAWS(HPH)-2017-6-57] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

R.Bhattacharyya, J. - (1.)- The taste of the pudding is in the eating. The propriety of a judicial order or the judgment is, therefore, to be tested in the light of the law and fact. It is the judicial seal which makes an order or judgment sacrosanet. Following from the above concept, the application of Judicial mind is the pole star to determine its objectivity.
(2.)The prosecuting agency has widely challenged the impugned order of bail granted to Nebulal which suffered rejections by the High Court from time to time by different Benches. Ultimately, Nebulal was admitted to bail by the Division Berich on certain conditions that pushed the prosecuting agency to the apex court where it challenged the viability of bail. The apex court, upon hearing the parties, transmitted the case for consideration of bail in accordance with law. The learned Public Prosecutor became very much sore over the granting of bail dated 28.3.96. In the context, the prayer for cancellation of bail has been lit up by the prosecuting agency on the ground that the enlargement of the petitioner on bail in the face of overwhelming materials is short of law. The rejection of prayer for ball on 13.3.96 before commitment and enlarging the petitioner on bail after commitment at an interval of fortnight on 28.3.96. according to the prosecuting agency, does not constitute any new and important circumstances which could pave the way for the petitioner to be enlarged on bail. The reflection of judicial mind is conspicuously silent while admitting the petitioner to bail. The above has led to a judicial conflagration.
(3.)The prayer has been studiously opposed by the learned Counsel Mr. Dutta for the petitioner on the count that there was total absence of application of judicial mind which is glaring from the order that prevailed upon the learned Session Judge to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The conduct of the petitioner is/was virgin after he was bailed out. In the premise, it is a futile exercise of the state to pray for cancellation of bail.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.