Section 164 CrPC Statement Recorded Without Procedural Safeguards Or 'Cooling-Off' Period Not A Valid Confession: Jharkhand High Court Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Investigation Is At A Nascent Stage If Custodial Interrogation Is Not Indispensable: Telangana High Court Actual Pay Drawn During Last 10 Months Must Be Basis For Pension Calculation, Regardless Of Notional Pay In Parent Bank: Punjab & Haryana High Court Limitation For Redemption Of Usufructuary Mortgage Starts Only When Mortgage Money Is Paid Or Tendered: Allahabad High Court Exclusion Of Natural Heir From Will Not A Suspicious Circumstance If Execution Is Duly Proved: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Travel Abroad Is A Basic Human Right; Permission Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Visit Is For 'Social Or Celebratory' Purpose: Andhra Pradesh High Court Citizen Cannot Be Externed Merely For Raising Grievances Against Government Decisions: Bombay High Court Lack Of Opportunity To Cross-Examine Partition Commissioner Does Not Vitiate Final Decree; Report Is Part Of Record: Calcutta High Court Section 27 Evidence Act Recoveries Inadmissible If Police Had Prior Knowledge Of Location Before Recording Disclosure: Delhi High Court Foreigners Act | Burden Of Proof To Establish Citizenship Solely On Proceedee, Never Shifts; Prescription For Parkinson's No Proof Of Mental Illness To Explain Testimony Contradictions: Gauhati High Court Trial Court Erred In Abating Suit While Application To Bring Legal Heirs On Record Was Pending: Gujarat High Court Places Of Worship Act 1991 Not A Shield Against Land Acquisition By State For Public Purpose: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Partition Deed Creating New Rights In Immovable Property Inadmissible In Evidence: Himachal Pradesh High Court Illiteracy No Excuse For Filing False Income Tax Returns, Court Must Presume Culpable Mental State Under Section 278E: Jharkhand High Court Trial Court Must Consider Convenience Of Family & Accused's Right To Assist Counsel While Deciding Jail Shifting Applications: J&K High Court Investigation Substantially Complete, Offence Carries Max 7 Years Jail: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail To Police Officers In Corruption Case Buyer's Knowledge Of Title Defect Doesn't Extinguish Statutory Warranty Of Title Unless Sale Deed Specifically Excludes It: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Sets Aside Appointment Of PAs To Judges, Says Relaxation Of Qualifications Via Circular Violates Article 14 BNSS | Mere Allegation Of Calling Deceased To Spot Not Sufficient To Deny Bail To Woman If Charge Sheet Filed: Orissa High Court Amendment To Rectify Property Description In Agreement To Sell Can Be Allowed At Any Stage Of Specific Performance Suit: Delhi High Court NDPS | Confession Before Police Cannot Be Sole Basis For Prosecution: Telangana High Court Grants Bail No Judicial Sanctity For Adulterous Relationships: J&K High Court Refuses To Quash Abduction FIR Involving Married Woman Habitual Offender Accused Of Brutal Murder Of SC Community Member Denied Bail: Kerala High Court Prosecution Fails To Prove Murder Charge As Recovery Witnesses Turn Hostile: Uttarakhand High Court Acquits Man Acquittal In Criminal Case Based On Benefit Of Doubt Does Not Automatically Absolve Employee From Disciplinary Liability: Madhya Pradesh High Court Punjab & Haryana HC Quashes FIR Against Woman For Dressing Pet Dog As Lord Krishna Personal Laws Cannot Be Used As Shield To Commit Gang Rape Under Garb Of Nikah Halala: Allahabad High Court

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