Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Anticipatory Bail Dismissed - Non-Disclosure of Crucial Facts: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent decision, the Supreme Court of India dismissed three separate anticipatory bail appeals filed by MD Kamran and others against the State of Bihar and another. The appeals were directed against the orders of the High Court of Judicature at Patna, which had denied anticipatory bail to the appellants in a case involving multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, including Sections 307, 147, 148, 149, 324, 325, 326, 380, 341, 342, 504, and 506.

The Supreme Court, in its order dated September 22, 2023, granted leave to consider the appeals but ultimately found that the appellants had failed to disclose crucial facts regarding the initiation of proceedings under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), and the subsequent dismissal of their Revision Petition against the same.

The Court's observations were clear: "Non-disclosure of relevant facts and factors in the Special Leave Petitions and, at any rate, when this Court passed the interim order of protection, would and should disentitle them to any relief at this stage. There cannot be any doubt with respect to the position that a person approaching this Court with no clean hands does not deserve any leniency or favor from this Court."

This decision underscores the importance of full and honest disclosure in legal proceedings, especially when seeking anticipatory bail. The Court's decision reaffirms the principle that individuals approaching the court with incomplete or misleading information may not be entitled to pre-arrest bail.

The appellants were represented by a team of advocates, including Mr. Randhir Kumar Ojha, Mr. Devashish Bharuka, Ms. Sarvshree, and others. On the other side, the State of Bihar was represented by Mr. Devashish Bharuka, Mr. Samir Ali Khan, Mr. Pranjal Sharma, and several other advocates.

This ruling serves as a reminder to litigants and legal practitioners about the importance of transparency and full disclosure in legal proceedings, as failing to do so may have significant consequences on the outcome of the case.

Date of Decision: September 22, 2023

MD KAMRAN & ORS. vs THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR. 

Latest Legal News