“POWER OF APPELLATE COURT TO GRANT BAIL”

Submitted by:

Nidhi Kumari, B.B.A.L.L.B (Hons.)

Roll No. 2235

Submitted to:

Ms. Preety Anand

Assistant Professor of Law

CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY,

PATNA

1
 TABLE OF CONTENT

DECLARATION BY THE CANDIDATE…………………...……………………………..3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT …………………………………………………………………..4

I. INTRODUCTION……..………………………………………………………….…5

1.1. AIMS AND OBJECTIVE

1.2. RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1.3. HYPOTHESIS

1.4. LIMITATIONS& SCOPE

1.5. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

II. CONCEPT OF BAIL......................................................................................................7

III. TYPES OF BAIL............................................................................................................9

IV. BAIL FOR BAILABLE AND NON-BAILABLE OFFENCE.....................................11

V. POWERS OF THE HIGH COURT OR COURT OF SESSION IN GRANTING

BAIL………………………………………………………………………………….13

VI. CANCELLATION OF BAIL.......................................................................................15

VII. RELEVANT CASES...................................................................................................17

VIII. CONCLUSION............................................................................................................19

IX. BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................................................................................20

2
 DECLARATION BY THE CANDIDATE

I, hereby, declare that the work reported in the B.B.A. L.L.B (Hons.) project report
entitled

“POWER OF APPELLATE COURT TO GRANT BAIL”

Submitted at CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, PATNA is an authentic

record of my work carried out under the supervision of Ms. Preety Anand, Assistant
Professor of Law. I have not submitted this work elsewhere for any other degree or diploma. I
am fully responsible for the contents of my project report.

(Signature of the candidate)

Nidhi Kumari

B.B.A.L.L.B(Hons.)

2nd Year

CNLU, Patna

3
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Writing a project is one of the most significant academic challenges, I have ever faced. Though
this project has been presented by me but there are many people who remained in veil, who
gave their all support and helped me to complete this project.

Firstly, I am very grateful to my subject teacher Ms. Preety Anand, Assistant Professor of Law
without the kind support of whom and help the completion of the project was a difficult task
for me. She donated her valuable time from her busy schedule to help me complete this project
and suggested me from where and how to collect data.

I am very thankful to the librarian who provided me several books on this topic which proved
beneficial in completing this project.

I acknowledgement my friends who gave their valuable advice which was very useful and
could not be ignored in writing the project.

Last but not the least, I am very much thankful to my parents and family, who always stand
aside me and helped me a lot in accessing all sorts of resources.

I thank all of them!

Nidhi Kumari

B.B.A.L.L.B (Hon.)

2nd Year, 4th Semester.

4
 I. INTRODUCTION

The Judicial system of India has been stratified into different levels. The redressal of legal
grievances involves three-tier hierarchical judicial machinery comprising the Supreme Court
situated in Delhi as the highest Court of the country. The High Courts situated in various States
and Union Territories constitute the second tier of this hierarchial order in the descending order.
The Courts in a particular State or a Union Territory Subordinate to their respective High
Courts, are the lower most rung of the hierarchy. Thus, the structure of the Court in Indian
Judiciary from lower to higher resembles a pyramid.

An appeal is a process by which a judgment/order of a subordinate Court is challenged before

its superior court. And those courts who entertains an appeal they have the Appellate
Jurisdiction for the same. A case is first filed in a lower court and can be appealed in Session,
High, then Supreme Court if not satisfied by the decision of lower court.

Bail in general, means the temporary release of an accused person on a temporary basis. As the
term bail has been derived from the French word bailer which means to deliver or to give. The
term bail has been used for a long time. As defined in the oxford dictionary bail is the
absolution of an accused person temporarily awaiting the trial or a sum of money is lodged by
the accused person as a guarantee for his appearance in the court.

The provisions regarding the bail and bonds have been specified from section 436 to 450 of the
Criminal Procedure Code. These provisions envisaged in the code gives the brief regarding the
provisions of the bail.

1.1. AIMS AND OBJECTIVE

The main of this project is

• To study about the power of Appellate Court to grant bail.

1.2. RESEARCH QUESTIONS

5
• What are the different types of bail in India?
• What are the conditions governing bail in a bailable offence?
• What are the conditions governing bail in non bailable offence
• what is mentioned under section 439 of CrPC, 1973?

1.3. HYPOTHESIS

The hypothesis of this project is that the idea of bail conveys the meaning that the accused
cannot be presumed to be guilty until his guilt is proved.

1.4. LIMITATIONS& SCOPE

Since the researcher is 2nd year student of 5-year course in CNLU, Patna, and due the current
global situation she can access only a limited area. And thus, lacks the chance of making the
project more effective. Hence after facing some difficulties she has managed to frame a
complete and the clearest picture of the problem, she could make through her best effort.

1.5. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The researcher mostly uses doctrinal mode of research. Some books and articles are also
referred. And the internet through which various websites was used extensively to collect data
and information related to this research topic.

6
 II. CONCEPT OF BAIL

The term Bail is not defined in Criminal Procedure Code, however, this term, in the most
common sense, indicates that the accused is set free from jail against a kind of security which
is given by the accused to the court that he will attend the proceedings in court against the
accusations made upon him and include personal bond and bail bond. Bail is a mechanism used
to ensure that the accused is present before the court and is available for Trial. The sections
436 to 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code deal with the concept of Bail.

When a person is arrested without a warrant, it is the duty of the police officer to inform such
an arrested person whether the offence he has been accused of committing is a bailable or non-
bailable offence. If it is a bailable offence, it is the person's right to be released on bail. There
is no clear distinction between a bailable and a non-bailable offence.1 However, there are some
established principles that are used by the courts to make this distinction. Generally, non-
cognizable offences are considered to be bailable.

Basic Rule

India is a democratic country and the basic concept of democracy is that every individual must
have personal liberty and freedom. It is the basic right of an individual which is protected by
the state. Thus, the concept of bail and personal liberty goes hand in hand and therefore every
individual including the accused person has the right to seek bail in order to get himself released
from custody until and unless proven guilty by a court of law. As enshrined under Article 21
of the Indian Constitution that the life and personal liberty of a person can’t be deprived except
by the procedures laid down by the law.

Object

1
Swapana Kode, Concept of bails, Legal service India, http://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-3090-
concept-of-bails.html.

7
The basic goal behind arresting and detaining a person behind the jail is that when the accused
is required by the court during the trial he must appear in court for the trial. The process of bail
is a complex mechanism, it is considered to be very delicate and conflicting at the same time.
The reason it is very delicate is that an accused seeks for bail when the trial is pending in the
court and it can’t be said that the accused is innocent or culprit. Sometimes when the bail is not
granted to the accused person it may curtail the liberty of the innocent accused or while granting
bail may result in giving extra-liberty and freedom to the actual culprit.
It is a comprehensive statement used in general that an accused person may escape his crimes
but an innocent shall not pay the price of some other person’s deed 2. Based on this ideology
the code of criminal procedure has bifurcated the offences into two categories.

2
Diva Rai, provisions relating to bail, Blog I Pleaders (Sep. 10, 2019), https://blog.ipleaders.in/provisions-
relating-to-bail/#Basic_Rule.

8
 III. TYPES OF BAIL

Difference between Bailable And Non-Bailable Offence

Non-bailable Offence

If the offence committed is non-bailable, the police officer cannot himself grant bail to the
accused. Only the magistrate can authorize the bail in a non-bailable offence. An offence is
said to be non bailable and when the punishment for it is more than 3 years. It is to be noted
that just because the offence is non-bailable does not mean that the person accused will not be
granted bail at all. In such cases it is up to the discretion of the court as to whether grant bail
or not.

Bailable Offence

In a bailable offence, the police officer in charge has the power to grant bail to the person
accused. An offence is said to be bailable when the punishment for that offence is lesser than
3 years. It is the right of the accused to be released on bail in a bailable offence3.

TYPES OF BAIL IN INDIA

Depending upon the sage of the criminal matter, there are commonly three types of bail in
India:

REGULAR BAIL

When a person commits a cognizable non-bailable offence (offences which are so grave that a
police officer can arrest the accused without a warrant or start the investigation without the

3
Sagar0014@, Bailable and Non-Bailable Offence, legal service India,
http://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-1017-bailable-and-non-bailable-
offence.html#:~:text=Difference%20between%20Bailable%20and%20Non-
Bailable%20Offences&text=Bailable%20offence%20means%20an%20offence,less%20grave%20and%20less%
20serious.

9
permission of a court), the police can take him under custody and after the custody period
expires, he must be sent to jail. Section 437 and 439 of the Cr.P.C gives the accused the right
to be released from such custody. So, a regular bail is basically the release of an accused from
custody to ensure his presence at the trial.

INTERIM BAIL

This bail is granted as a temporary means and granted for a short period of time, either during
the time of pendency of an application or when the application of anticipatory or regular bail
is pending before the court. Interim bail is always conditional and can be extended, but if it
expires before the accused has been granted an anticipatory bail or regular bail and he fails to
pay the amount required for continuing the bail, then he loses his right of freedom and will be
taken under custody.

ANTICIPATORY BAIL4

Anticipatory bail is self-defining. It is a type of bail which is given to someone who is in

anticipation of getting arrested for a non-bailable offence by the police. This is a very essential
bail in recent times because business rivals and other influential people often try to frame their
opponents in false cases. This is an advanced bail mentioned under Section 438 of the Act. A
person who has been granted an anticipatory bail cannot be arrested by the police.

4
Qwerty 9729, types of bails in India and conditions for grant for bail, Legal service India,
http://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-1804-types-of-bail-in-india-and-conditions-for-grant-for-
bail.html.

10
 IV. BAIL FOR BAILABLE AND NON-BAILABLE OFFENCE

BAIL FOR BAILABLE OFFENCE

According to section 436 of CrPC5, If the offence alleged is bailable, then, the accused is
entitled for Bail as a matter of right, may be before Police station itself, or if forwarded to
Magistrates Court, before Magistrates court. In bailable offences bail is a right and not a favour.
In such offences there is no question of any discretion in granting bail. Bail can be claimed as
of right and there is a statutory duty imposed upon the Police Officer as well as the Court to
release a person on bail if he is prepared to give bail. Such a person can also be released on his
own bond in a fit case. It is only where the accused is unable to furnish bail then he should be
kept in detention.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rasiklal vs. Kishore Khanchand Wadhwani 6 held
that: “As soon as it appears that the accused person is prepared to give bail, the police officer
or the court before whom he offers to give bail, is bound to release him on such terms as to bail
as may appear to the officer or the court to be reasonable. It would even be open to the officer
or the court to discharge such person on his executing a bond as provided in the Section instead
of taking bail from him”. However, where the offences alleged are both Bailable and Non-
Bailable, the offence would be tried as Non Bailable offence, and benefit of securing Bail on
the premise of Bailable offence would not be available to the accused.

BAIL FOR NON-BAILABLE OFFENCES

The provisions of section 4377 empower two authorities to consider the question of bail, namely
(1) a court and (2) an officer-in-charge of the police station who has arrested or detained
without warrant a person accused or suspected of the commission of a non-bailable offence.
Although this section deals with the power or discretion of a court as well as a police officer in

5
The Code of Criminal Procedure Act, 1973, § 436, No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 1973 (India).
6
Rasiklal V/s Kishore Khanchand Wadhwani AIR 2009 1341.
7
The Code of Criminal Procedure Act, 1973, § 437, No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 1973 (India).

11
charge of police station to grant bail in non- bailable offences it has also laid down certain
restrictions on the power of a police officer to grant bail and certain rights of an accused person
to obtain bail when he is being tried by a Magistrate.

Section 437, Criminal Procedure Code, deals with the powers of the trial court and of the
Magistrate to whom the offender is produced by the police or the accused surrenders or appears,
to grant or refuse bail to person accused of, or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable
offence. The power to release on bail a person accused of a non-bailable offence is conferred
upon only one class of police officers, namely an officer-in-charge of the Police Station under
section 437 sub-Section (I). Since the power to grant bail is permissive and not obligatory, it
has to be exercised with great caution because of the risk and stakes involved. Before exercising
his power, a station officer ought to satisfy himself that the release on bail would not prejudice
the prosecution in bringing home the guilt of the accused. In case the officer in charge admits
an accused to bail, it is mandatory for him to record the reasons or special reasons in the case
diary and preserve the bail bonds until they are discharged either by the appearance of the
accused in court or by the order of a competent court.

For the purpose of bail in non-bailable offence, the Legislature has classified them under two
heads:
(1) those which are punishable with death or imprisonment for life;
(2) those which are not so punishable.
In case of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life a station officer cannot
enlarge a person on bail, if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that he has been guilty
of such offence. The age or sex or sickness or infirmity of the accused cannot be considered by
a police officer for the purpose of granting bail. These matters may be taken in view by a court
only. An officer- in-charge of the police station may grant bail only when there are no
reasonable grounds for believing that the accused has committed a nonbailable offence or when
the non-bailable offence complained of is not punishable with death or life imprisonment.8

8
Sri M Sreenu, Bail, Anticipatory Bail, Mandatory Bail & Bail after Conviction, districts.ecourts.gov.in, 2 14,
https://districts.ecourts.gov.in/sites/default/files/6-Bail%20Anticipatory%20Bails%20-
%20Sri%20M%20Sreenu.pdf.

12
 V. POWERS OF THE HIGH COURT OR COURT OF SESSION IN GRANTING
BAIL

Section 4399 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

According to Section 439(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a High Court or Court of
Session may direct, —

(a) That any person accused of an offence and in custody be released on bail, and if the offence
is of the nature specified in sub-section (3) of Section 437, may impose any condition which it
considers necessary for the purposes mentioned in that sub-section;

b) That any condition imposed by a Magistrate when releasing any person on bail be set aside
or modified.

However, the High Court or the Court of Sessions shall, before granting bail to a person who
is accused of an offence which is triable exclusively by the Court of Sessions or which, though
not so triable, is punishable with imprisonment for life, give notice of the application for bail
to the public prosecutor unless it is, for reasons to be recorded in writing of opinion that it is
not practicable to give such notice. As per Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
a High Court or Court of Sessions may direct that any person who has been released on bail
under Chapter XXXIII (i.e., relating to bail) be arrested and commit him to custody. The
powers of the High Court in granting bail are very wide; even so where the offence is non-
bailable, various considerations will have to be taken into account before bail is granted in case
of non-bailable offence.

Under Section 439(1) of the Code, the High Court can only release the accused in cases pending
anywhere in the State on bail or reduce the amount of bail, but cannot order the arrest or
commitment to custody of any person who has been released on bail by the lower Court but it
can order to arrest the person who had been released on bail under Section 439(2) of the Code10.

9
The Code of Criminal Procedure Act, 1973, § 439, No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 1973 (India).
10
Sri M Sreenu, Bail, Anticipatory Bail, Mandatory Bail & Bail after Conviction, districts.ecourts.gov.in, 2 14,
https://districts.ecourts.gov.in/sites/default/files/6-Bail%20Anticipatory%20Bails%20-
%20Sri%20M%20Sreenu.pdf.

13
In a recent judgment of Sundeep Kumar Bafna vs. State of Maharashtra11 , Hon’ble Supreme
Court has held that there are no restrictions on the High Court or Sessions Court to entertain an
application for bail, provided, accused is in custody. The judgment has put an to end the
decades old practice of first filing a regular Bail Application before a Magistrate having
jurisdiction, and get it rejected for the purpose of approaching the Sessions Court or High Court
for bail.

SUPREME COURT

The Supreme Court is generally reluctant to interfere with the High Court’s decision to grant
bail or reject bail under section 438 and 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

The legislature in its wisdom has vested the power to grant bail to the Sessions court and the
High Courts and not the Supreme Court, and thus, the Supreme Court has not unduly interfered
with the discretionary power to grant bail.

However, in exceptional cases or circumstances, the Supreme Court has, from time to time,
granted bail to persons whose application have been rejected by the High Court. In each such
instances, though, the Supreme Court has made it clear that it was an exceptional use of its
power to interfere with such verdicts, and the same should not be held as precedent.

Thus, it is unlikely that in any particular instances a person would get bail from the Supreme
Court, but there’s always a remote possibility that such a thing may happen.

11
Sundeep Kumar Bafna vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr 2014 AIR SC 2115.
14
 VI. CANCELLATION OF BAIL

The Code of Criminal Procedure makes clear provisions for cancellation of bail and taking
accused back in custody. Section 437(5) states that any court which has released a person on
bail under sub-section (1) or sub-s. (2) of s. 437, may, if it considers it necessary so to do, direct
that such person be arrested and commit him to custody.

Similarly, section 439 confers on the High Court and the Court of Session power to cancel bail.
Section 439(2) The Code of Criminal Procedure makes clear provisions for cancellation of bail
and taking accused back in custody.

The power of cancellation of bail can be resorted to broadly in the following two situations:

(i) On merits of a case mainly on the ground of the order granting bail being perverse, or
passed without due application of mind or in violation of any substantive or procedural
law; and
(ii) On the ground of misuse of liberty after the grant of bail or other supervening
circumstances.

Bail in the first type of cases can be cancelled by superior courts only, whereas in the second
category of cases bail can be cancelled by the very court which may have granted bail. There
appears to be confusion galore in the judicial pronouncements on the aspect of cancellation of
bail on merits and on the ground of subsequent conduct of accused already on bail or on the
ground of supervening circumstances. Sometimes the principles of cancellation of bail on the
ground of subsequent conduct or intervention of new circumstances have been wrongly brought
in and applied to the cases where cancellation of bail is sought on the merits of the case. It is
therefore necessary to clearly understand the aforesaid distinct principles of cancellation of bail
operating in these two different fields. As stated herein above the legal provisions pertaining
to cancellation of bail under Cr.P.C are mainly contained in S.437 (5) and 439(2) 12. Section
437(5) provides for the cancellation of bail by a court other than a High Court or a Sessions
Court. Meaning thereby it confers power of cancellation on the Magistrate court. It states that
a court other than High court or Sessions Court, may, if it considers necessary to do so, direct

12
The Code of Criminal Procedure Act, 1973, § 437 & 439, No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 1973 (India).

15
that a person released on bail by it be arrested and committed to custody. By judicial
pronouncements this provision has been interpreted to mean that any court that has released
the accused on bail has power to direct arrest of such person and commit him to custody if
subsequent to the release on bail, the circumstances justify to do so. Ordinarily the court would
be entitled to exercise this power only where the person released on bail is guilty of misuse of
the liberty granted by the court or where there is new development in the investigation or
recovery of cogent material prima facie involving accused with heinous crime. However, bail
once granted should not be cancelled in a mechanical manner without considering whether any
supervening circumstances have rendered it no longer conducive to a fair trial to allow the
accused to retain his freedom by enjoying the concession of bail during the trial13.

13
Cancellation of Bail, Hello Counsel (March 23, 2019), https://www.hellocounsel.com/cancellation-of-
bail/#:~:text=Bail%20granted%20can%20be%20cancelled,once%20bail%20has%20been%20granted.

16
 VII. RELEVANT CASES

In Mukeshbhai Nanubhai Patel v. State of Gujarat14, the order of the Sessions Court
granting bail on the condition that the accused should pay a certain amount, per month till the
end of the proceedings was held incorrect.

A person can move to the High Court or the Sessions Court to apply for bail under this Section
439 only when he is in custody. Naresh Kumar Yadav v. Ravindra Kumar15, it has been
held that a person is said to be in custody, within the meaning of this section only when he is
in duress either because he/she is held by the investigation agency or other police or allied
authority or is under the control of the court having been remanded by Judicial order, or having
presented himself/herself to the court's jurisdiction and submitted to its orders by physical
presence.

The discretion granted to the High Court to grant bail is very wide and remains unfettered by
Section 437 of the Code. In Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan16, it was held that
Section 439 is in a way an expansion of Section 437.

In Sanjay Chandra v. CBI17, the followed points were clarified by the Supreme Court,
An accused is detained in custody not because of his guilt, but because there are sufficient
probable grounds for the charge against him as to make it proper that he should be tried and
because the detention is necessary to ensure his presence during trial.
While granting bail, three main elements are necessary to be considered, the charge, the nature
of the evidence by which it is supported and the punishment to which the party will be liable if
convicted.
Bail discretion, on the basis of evidence about the criminal record of the defendant is also of
an exercise of relevance.

14
Mukeshbhai Nanubhai Patel v. State of Gujarat 1998 Cri LJ 194 (Guj).
15
Naresh Kumar Yadav v. Ravindra Kumar (2008) 1SCC 632.
16
Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan (2004) 7 SCC 528.
17
Sanjay Chandra v. Cbi (2012) 1 SCC 40.

17
A person is acquitted by the lower court for a grave offence, applying for bail at the High court
will have a greater chance of getting bail as his chances of jumping the gauntlet of justice is
much lesser as he already has confidence because of being acquitted once.
If the trial is to take a long period of time, it is not in the interest of justice that the accused are
in jail for an indefinite period.
The accused should not be denied bail merely because of the sentiments of the community is
against bail. According to the law, the accused is innocent until he is proven guilty.

In Sundeep Kumar Bafna v. State of Maharashtra18, it was discussed, For the application
of this section, it is necessary that the person seeking for bail is in custody. Custody, under this
section includes when a person is arrested by the police, brought before a magistrate or when
the magistrate orders remand to judicial or other custody. It is important to note that a person
is said to be in (Judicial) custody even when he/she surrenders in court and submits to its
direction.

Further, it was held, if the magistrate disallows bail, the accused can move the Court of Sessions
for the same. There is no such provision in the Code that prohibits a High Court from hearing
a bail application and subsequently granting bail provided such a person is in custody.

18
Sundeep Kumar Bafna v. State of Maharashtra &Anr 2014 AIR SC 2115.

18
 VIII. CONCLUSION

When a person is detained before the final judgement, there is a question on such a person's
personal liberty as prescribed by Article 21. In most bail cases there is always going to be a
conflict between the interest of the society at large and the personal liberty of the accused. The
Personal liberty is of utmost importance in our constitutional system recognized under Article
21. Deprivation of personal liberty must be founded on the most serious considerations relevant
to welfare objectives of the society as specified in the Constitution. Even though the law of the
land and Hon’ble Higher courts in various cases have tried to intervene and also have laid down
certain guidelines to be followed but unfortunately nothing has been done about it. There is
also a strong need felt for a complete review of the bail system keeping in mind the socio-
economic condition of the majority of our population. While granting bail the court must also
look at the socio-economic plight of the accused and must also have a compassionate attitude
towards them. A proper scrutiny may be done to determine whether the accused has his roots
in the community which would deter him from fleeing from the court.

“Society has a vital interest in grant or refusal of bail because every criminal offence is an
offence against the state. The order granting or refusing bail must reflect perfect balance
between the conflicting interests, namely, sanctity of individual liberty and the interest of the
society”. – Justice Dalveer Bhandari in S.S. Mhere vs. State of Maharashtra (2010).

19
 IX. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Websites Referred: -

• https://www.hellocounsel.com/.
• http://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/.
• https://blog.ipleaders.in/.

PDF Referred: -

• https://districts.ecourts.gov.in/sites/default/files/6-
Bail%20Anticipatory%20Bails%20-%20Sri%20M%20Sreenu.pdf.

Statute Referred: -

• The Code of Criminal Procedure Act, 1973, § 437 & 439, No. 2, Acts of Parliament,
1973 (India).
• The Code of Criminal Procedure Act, 1973, § 436, No. 2, Acts of Parliament, 1973
(India).

Cases Referred: -

• Sundeep Kumar Bafna v. State of Maharashtra &Anr 2014 AIR SC 2115.

• Mukeshbhai Nanubhai Patel v. State of Gujarat 1998 Cri LJ 194 (Guj).
• Naresh Kumar Yadav v. Ravindra Kumar (2008) 1SCC 632.
• Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan (2004) 7 SCC 528.
• Sanjay Chandra v. Cbi (2012) 1 SCC 40.
• Rasiklal V/s Kishore Khanchand Wadhwani AIR 2009 1341.

20