Plaintiff In Title Suit Must Prove Own Case On Independent Evidence, Cannot Rely On Weakness Of Defence: Supreme Court Advocate Commissioner's Failure To Localize Land Per Title Deeds Fatal To Encroachment Claim: Andhra Pradesh High Court Enmity Is A Double-Edged Weapon, Can Be Motive For False Implication As Much As For Crime: Allahabad High Court Parity In Bail: Karnataka High Court Grants Relief To Accused In Robbery Case As Mastermind & Main Offenders Were Already Enlarged Specific Performance Denied If Buyer Fails To Prove Continuous Readiness With Funds; Part-Payment Can't Be Forfeited Without Specific Clause: Delhi High Court Seized Vehicles Shouldn't Be Kept In Police Stations For Long, Courts Must Judiciously Exercise Power To Release On Supurdagi: Madhya Pradesh High Court Prolonged Incarceration Militates Against Article 21, Constitutional Principles Must Override Section 37 NDPS Rigors: Punjab & Haryana High Court Onus On Individual To Prove Claim Of 'Fear Of Religious Persecution' For Exemption Under Foreigners Act: Calcutta High Court Direct Recruits Cannot Claim Seniority From A Date Prior To Their Entry Into The Cadre: Orissa High Court Sale Deed Executed After Land Vests In State Confers No Title; Post-Vesting Purchaser Can’t Claim Compensation: Calcutta High Court No Right To Blanket Regularization For Contractual Staff; State Must Timely Fill Sanctioned Vacancies Under Reserved Quota: Supreme Court Non-Signatory Collaborator Under 'Deed Of Joint Undertaking' Can Invoke Arbitration Clause As A 'Veritable Party': Supreme Court Insolvency Proceedings Cannot Be Used As Coercive Recovery Mechanism For Complex Contractual Disputes: Supreme Court Legal Heirs Who Were Parties To Sale Cannot Challenge Transfer Under PTCL Act After Long Delay: Supreme Court SC/ST Act | Proceedings To Annul Sale Illegal If Initiated By Legal Heirs Who Were Parties To The Transaction: Supreme Court Consumers Cannot Be Burdened With Tariff Charges Beyond Period Of Service Delivery: Supreme Court Mere Non-Production Of Old Selection Records Or Non-Publication Of All Candidates' Marks No Ground To Direct Appointment: Supreme Court

Anticipatory bail isn't limited- Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court of India said on Thursday that anticipatory bail cannot be set for a short period of time while hearing an application for it.

A bench of Justices MR Shah and Sudhanshu Dhulia questioned, "How can an anticipatory bail be confined to four weeks?!"

The Calcutta High Court's judgement granting lawmaker Monirul Islam anticipatory bail in 2021, with a four-week maximum, was being challenged in the appeal Monirul Islam filed.

When arguing against the High Court's decision, the petitioner's attorney said that the court had acknowledged that the FIR against the petitioner was lodged to settle political scores.

Since October 8, 2021, I am protected by an order. She added that the questioned FIR was filed two years after the offence.

"Mr. Counsel, have you heard anticipatory bail for a limited period?" the Bench questioned Senior Advocate Siddhartha Dave, who was representing the State.

Your Lordships have, however, also stated that it is possible. There has been a ruling from the Constitution Bench, Dave retorted.

When the High Court rules that an incarcerated interrogation is not necessary, what was the reason for placing him under house arrest for four weeks? The High Court had instructed him to turn himself up after four weeks. The Bench questioned, "Where is the issue of surrender here?

According to the senior attorney, the rationale might be because the claims in the case were fairly serious.

The Bench said, "Then the Court need not have entertained the anticipatory bail."

"Just because you have anticipatory bail does not imply that ordinary bail application cannot be heard," the court declared as the session went on. While we are giving you anticipatory relief, you must also submit a regular bail application, which will be evaluated in accordance with the law.

When the petitioner was arrested, the court modified the High Court's ruling to allow for his release on bail. The Trial Court was tasked by the Court with setting bail requirements.

The Bench further directed that if the petitioner moved an application seeking regular bail, that should be considered on merits without being influenced by this order.

"However, at the same time, if the petitioner moves an appropriate application before the concerned Court for regular bail, it will be considered in accordance with law and on its own merits without being influenced by the grant of anticipatory bail. Till such application for bail is moved in four weeks from today, till then, the present order shall operate."

Monirul Islam vs. The State of West Bengal 

Latest Legal News