TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 2026X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erms of Section 438 Cr.P.C. can exercise such jurisdiction against the backdrop of order of the court of cognizance issuing process is not res integra - A division bench of this court, as far back as in November, 1996 in PV. NARSIMHA RAO VERSUS STATE (CBI/SPE) [ 1998 (4) TMI 503 - SUPREME COURT] had answered a reference on precisely the same question of law contrary to what is being canvassed by the petitioner. Pertinent to note that in that case also the petitioner had come up to this Court for grant of anticipatory bail in the wake of summons issued by court of Magistrate against him. The division bench, answering the reference made by a learned single judge had, inter alia, observed that a person against whom accusations of cognizable an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5 on 06.01.2015 and took up investigation into offences punishable under Sections 306 and 498A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) in such context. The police having carried out investigation submitted its final report (charge-sheet) under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) in the court of Metropolitan Magistrate on 14.05.2018. The Magistrate is stated to have taken cognizance on the said charge-sheet and issued summons to the second respondent in exercise of the power vested in the said court by Section 204 Cr.P.C., statedly for the offence under Section 306 IPC. 2. Against the backdrop of above facts, the second respondent moved an application (Bail application no. 873/2018) in the court of sessions, praying for an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered appearance through counsel, on his own. Both he and the respondent State question the locus standi of the petitioner to bring the petition at hand, it also being argued that the exercise of the power to grant anticipatory bail by the court of sessions through the impugned order is covered by decisions, inter alia, of the Supreme Court. 5. Having heard all sides at length and having gone through the relevant law on the subject, even if the issue of locus standi of the petitioner were to be kept aside, this Court finds no merit in the submissions of the petitioner attributing impropriety to the court of sessions in grant of relief to the second respondent by order dated 05.07.2018. 6. The question as to whether the court vested with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
