SAVITRI GOENKA versus KUSUM LATA DAMANI AND ORS.

SAVITRI GOENKA versus KUSUM LATA DAMANI AND ORS.

The impugned order is vitiated since notice was not served on the appellant and the practice of converting applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to one under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for bail has not been approved by the Supreme Court.

Parties
Appellant: SA Vitri Goenka; Respondent No. 1 (accused): Kusum Lata Damani; Respondents: Other Respondents
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
02 November 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Final Appellate Stage After High Court Order
Outcome
Appeal partly allowed; impugned order set aside; matter remanded for fresh consideration.
Legal Topics
Judicial Propriety, Notice and Service, Bail, Interim Protection, Code of Criminal Procedure Sections 482 and 438

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SA Vitri Goenka

Appellant

Kusum Lata Damani

Respondent No. 1 (accused)

Other Respondents

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Final Appellate Stage After High Court Order

  1. 1 Whether the High Court was proper in converting an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to one for bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. and granting interim protection without service on the complainant

Ratio Decidendi

The impugned order is vitiated since notice was not served on the appellant and the practice of converting applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to one under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for bail has not been approved by the Supreme Court.

Court Disposition

Appeal partly allowed; impugned order set aside; matter remanded for fresh consideration.

Orders

  • Impugned order set aside.
  • Parties directed to appear before High Court (Single Judge) on 23rd November, 2007 without further notice.