Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Prem Dass Kalra Vs. Sushil Kumar

Prem Dass Kalra vs Sushil Kumar

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Dec 31, 1997
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/699513

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Criminal Miscellaneous Appeal No. 16 of 1997
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 437--Bail--Unnecessary remark--The Court grunting bail using the expression 'culprit' and issuing warning not to repeat such conduct in future--Observation directed to be expunged from record. -

Key legal issue
Criminal
Acts & sections
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 437

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Prem Dass Kalra

Advocate Siddharth Luthra, Adv

Respondent

Sushil Kumar

Legal References

Reported In
1998(46)DRJ188

Excerpt

criminal procedure code, 1973 - section 437--bail--unnecessary remark--the court grunting bail using the expression 'culprit' and issuing warning not to repeat such conduct in future--observation directed to be expunged from record. - mohd. shamim, j.(1) crl.m. 55/98 allowed subject to all just exceptions.(2) crl.m.(m) 16/98 heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. since a very short point is involved i do not think it necessary to issue notice in the present case and i proceed to dispose of the same straightaway.(3) the grievance of the petitioner through the present petition is that the learned lower court while disposing of the application for cancellation of bail has used the word culprit while referring to the petitioner. the other grievance is that the petitioner has been warned from creating obstruction and indulging in such type of other activities. according to the learned counsel the same should not have been done.(4) considering the above facts and circumstances, i think it expedient in the interest of justice to expunge the word culprit and the later portion of the order referred to above. it is hereby ordered accordingly.(5) the petition stands disposed of.

Full Judgment

Mohd. Shamim, J.

(1) CRL.M. 55/98 Allowed subject to all just exceptions.

(2) CRL.M.(M) 16/98 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Since a very short point is involved I do not think it necessary to issue notice in the present case and I proceed to dispose of the same straightaway.

(3) The grievance of the petitioner through the present petition is that the learned lower court while disposing of the application for cancellation of bail has used the word culprit while referring to the petitioner. The other grievance is that the petitioner has been warned from creating obstruction and indulging in such type of other activities. According to the learned counsel the same should not have been done.

(4) Considering the above facts and circumstances, I think it expedient in the interest of justice to expunge the word culprit and the later portion of the order referred to above. It is hereby ordered accordingly.

(5) The petition stands disposed of.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial