AIR 2005 SUPREME COURT 3309 ::2005 AIR SCW 4003 ::2005 AIR - Jhar. H. C. R. 2328 ::(2005) 120 DLT 193 ::(2005) 3 CurCriR 198 ::(2005) 3 AllCriR 2762 ::2005 CriLR(SC&MP) 692 ::2005 (6) SCC 767 ::2005 SCC(Cri) 1483 ::2006 (1) MadLJ(Cri) 84 ::(2005) 4 RecCriR 201 ::(2005) 6 Scale 527 ::2005 CriLR(SC MAH GUJ) 692 ::2005 (3) AndhLT(Cri) 256 SC ::2005 (2) ALD(CRL) 522 ::(2005) 3 AndhLT(Cri) 256 ::2005 (4) AllCriLR 328 ::2006 (1) CalLJ 370 ::(2005) 2 ChandCriC 330 ::(2005) 3 ChandCriC 1 ::(2005) 82 DRJ 441 ::(2005) 82 DRJ 624 ::(2005) 3 Mad LW 254 ::(2007) MatLR 64 ::2005 (32) OCR 385 ::2005 (4) LabLN 330 ::(2005) 4 JCR 155 (SC) ::2005 (4) JLJR 27 ::2005 (4) PatLJR 56 ::(2005) 6 SCJ 109 ::2005 (3) Crimes 223 ::2005 (6) SLT 273 ::2005 (5) Supreme 642 ::(2005) 53 AllCriC 516 ::(2005) 33 AllIndCas 22 (SC) ::2006 All MR(CRI) 73 NOC ::(2005) 2 EFR 542 ::(2005) 7 JT 375 (SC) ::2005 (7) JT 375 ::2005 (8) SRJ 199

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Calcutta)*

Hon'ble Judge(s): R. C. Lahoti, C. K. Thakker, P. K. Balasubramanyan , JJJ

Constitution of India , Art.134— Expunction of remark - Appellant Judicial Officer rehearing bail application of accused in NDPS case - Again rejecting bail - Direction of High Court to give an opportunity of hearing to accused complied with and carried out by appellant while giving re-hearing - Remarks made and strictures passed against appellant by single Judge of High Court in revision that he has shown impolite and arrogant attitute - Is uncalled for and unwarranted moreso when they were neither necessary for deciding controversy nor integral part of judgment - Said remarks hence expunged. Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974) , S.482— In the present case, appellant was Additional District and Sessions Judge and in charge of Special Court under NDPS Act. Accused was produced before him and his bail application was rejected. Another application for bail was moved by the accused praying for grant of bail on the assertion by the accused that no charge-sheet had been submitted within the stipulated period. The appellant, in absence of the public prosecutor and in the light of averments made by accused, ordered him to be enlarged on bail. It was thus a case of 'default bail'. On the same day, however, at a later stage, the public prosecutor appeared, drew attention of the Court that the factual basis on which the accused was ordered to be enlarged on bail ....