HAZARI LAL DAS versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR.

Citation: [2009] 14 S.C.R. 195 · Decided: 08-09-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: TARUN CHATTERJEE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

-( 
[2009] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 195 
~ 
... 
\ 
J.. 
HAZARI LAL DAS 
A 
v. 
STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR. 
(Criminal Appeal No. 1_732 of 2009) 
SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 
8 
[TARUN CHATTERJEE AND R.M. LODHA, JJ.] 
.l.. 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s.438 - Complaint 
u/ss. 403, 409, 420, 467134 /PC- Grant of anticipatory bail-
Cancelled by High Court - On appeal, held: Cancellation of c 
-
bail not justified - Record does not show interference or 
attempt of interference with the due course of administration 
of justice, or abuse of the concession, on the part of the 
)-
accused. 
D 
Dau/at Ram and Ors. vs. State of Haryana (1995)1 SCC 
349, referred to. 
Case Law Reference: 
(1995) 1 sec 349 
Referred to 
Para 9 
E 
.,_ 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal 
No. 1732 of 2009. 
From the Judgment & Order dated 18.9.2008 of the High 
Court of Calcutta in CRM. No. 7046 of 2008. 
F 
Ambika Ray, Zaki Ahmad Khan, M. Khairati, lrshad Ahmad 
for the Appellant. 
Tara Chandra Sharma, Neelam Sharma, Pankhuri 
Shrivastava, Jitendra Mahapatra, Shibashish Pattanaik, G 
~ 
Merusagar Samantaray for the Respondents. 
The Order of the was Court delivered by 
. 
' 
195 
H 
196 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 
' ,
" 
I 
A 
ORDER 
~-
R.M. LODHA, J. 1. Leave granted. 
2. On the basis of the complaint made by Jayanta Naskar, 
B 
Secretary, Sambhunagar High School, P.O. Sambhunagar, a 
First Information Report being FIR No.15/2008 was lodged on 
May 30, 2008 under Sections 403, 409, 420, 467/34 IPC, at 
Police Station Gosaba, District 24 Parganas (South). It is 
..4_ 
alleged that appellant who is Headmaster of Sambhunagar 
High School opened a bank account No. 0855010083094 with 
c the U.B.I., Lalbazar Branch, Kolkata on April 30, 2008; that the 
appellant introduced his servant Gour Ohara as a secretary of 
-.. 
the school; that the said account was opened jointly with his 
servant and that he deposited a cheque of Rs.6,00,000/- which 
had come to the school from Sports and Youth Services (Sports 
'"( 
D Wing), Government of West Bengal, with an intention to 
misappropriate the said amount. It is also alleged that the said 
account was opened by the appellant without any resolution of 
the Managing Committee of ttie school and that he submitted 
false and forged copy of the minutes of the meeting No.15 
E dated April 26, 2008 with the seal of the Headmaster, 
Sambhunagar High School. 
-<_ 
3. The appellant made an application for anticipatory bail 
" 
under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before 
F 
the Sessions Judge, Alipore, District 24 Parganas (South). 
4. Learned, Sessions Judge (l/C) after hearing the counsel 
~ 
for the appellant and the Public Prosecutor enlarged the 
appellant on anticipatory bail vide Order dated July 3, 2008. It 
was ordered that in the event of arrest, the appellant shall be 
G released on anticipatory bail of Rs.5,000/- with two sureties of 
Rs.2,500/- each; one of such surety shall be local. The Sessions 
__, 
Judge (l/C) also put a condition that the appellant shall attend 
the police station once in a week for eight weeks. He also 
imposed usual conditions as laid down in Section 438 (2) 
H Cr.P.C. 
HAZARI LAL DAS v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL & 
197 
ANR. [R.M. LODHA, J.] 
' 
5. The complainant - Jayant Naskar approached the High 
A 
J. 
Court for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted by the· 
, 
Sessions Judge (l/C) to the appellant. By the impugned order 
dated September 18, 2008, the High Court cancelled the 
anticipatory bail granted by the Sessions Judge (l/C). 
6. On December 12, 2008 this Court while issuing notice 
B 
stayed the operation of the impugned order. The order of 
J._ 
Sessions Judge (l/C) granting anticipatory bail, thus, has 
remained operative. 
7. We heard the learned counsel for the parties and c 
perused the order of the High Court. 
-
' 
8. Although the High Court did notice in the impugned 
order that the considerations which should be in the mind of 
y 
the court while considering the prayer for grant of bail are not 
D 
the same for the purpose of cancellation of bail, yet we find that 
these considerations were not kept in mind and the order of 
the Sessions Judge granting anticipatory bail was set aside. 
9. In Do/at Ram And Ors. vs. State of Haryana, (1995) 1 
E 
SCC 349, this Court held: 
~ 
"4. Rejection of bail in a non-bailable case at the initial 
stage and the cancellation of bail so granted, have to be 
considered and dealt with on
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.