2019 Y L R Note 4
Findings by the Trial Court, in the present case, would prejudice the case of the prosecution as the Trial Court at pre-mature stage had formed opinion that case was covered under S.337-D, P.P.C. instead of S.324, P.P.C
This Citation is for Criminal Lawyer, -Application for cancellation of bail—Findings of Court causing prejudice to either party— Applicant/ complainant contended that Trial Court had found that offence under S.324, P.P.C. was yet to be determined and the case was covered under S.337-D, P.P.C., findings so recorded in the order caused prejudice to the case of prosecution— Respondent / accused contended that he had not misused the concession of bail in any way—Record revealed that both the parties had lodged FIRs against each other with regard to the same incident, and admittedly injuries were received by both sides thus, Trial Court had rightly found that the present case was one of further inquiry—Record also reflected that all the ingredients were lacking in favour of the applicant—No complaint existed on record that after release on bail the accused was reluctant to appear before the Trial Court—Court while dealing with the application for bail had to form its opinion tentatively on the basis of available record and ought to have used the wordings with great care and caution, keeping into consideration that such wordings or findings must not prejudice the case of either party—Findings by the Trial Court, in the present case, would prejudice the case of the prosecution as the Trial Court at pre-mature stage had formed opinion that case was covered under S.337-D, P.P.C. instead of S.324, P.P.C.—High Court expunged the findings of the Trial Court to such extent–. Best Case Law For Advocate Practicing In Criminal Law.