CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints Minimum Wages Cannot Be Ignored While Determining Just Compensation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Re-Fixes Income of Deceased Mason, Enhances Interest to 7.5% 34 IPC | Common Intention Is Inferred From Manner Of Attack, Weapons Carried And Concerted Conduct: Allahabad High Court Last Date of Section 4 Publication Is Crucial—Error in Date Cannot Depress Market Value: Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation in Beed Land Acquisition Appeals Order 26 Rule 10-A CPC | Rarest of Rare: When a Mother Denies Her Own Child: Rajasthan High Court Orders DNA Test to Decide Maternity Acquittal Is Not a Passport Back to Uniform: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable in NDPS Case Despite Trial Court Verdict Limitation Under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Cannot Be Ignored — But Section 473 Keeps the Door Open in the Interest of Justice: P&H HC Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness Employee Cannot Switch Cadre At His Sweet Will After Accepting Promotion: J&K High Court Rejects Claim For Retrospective Assistant Registrar Appointment Anticipatory Bail Cannot Expire With Charge-Sheet: Supreme Court Reiterates Liberty Is Not Bound by Procedural Milestones Order II Rule 2 Cannot Eclipse Amendment Power Under Order VI Rule 17: MP High Court Refuses to Stall Will-Based Title Suit Grounds of Arrest Must Be Personal, Not Formal – But Detailed Allegations Suffice: Kerala High Court Upholds Arrest in Sabarimala Gold Misappropriation Case Grounds of Arrest Are Not a Ritual – They Are a Constitutional Mandate Under Article 22(1): Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Arrest for Non-Supply of Written Grounds Sect. 25 NDPS | Mere Ownership Cannot Fasten NDPS Liability – ‘Knowingly Permits’ Must Be Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt: MP High Court Section 308 CrPC | Revocation of Pardon Is Not Automatic on Prosecutor’s Certificate: Karnataka High Court Joint Family and Ancestral Property Are Alien to Mohammedan Law: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Injunction Right to Health Cannot Wait for Endless Consultations: Supreme Court Pulls Up FSSAI Over Delay in Front-of-Pack Warning Labels If A Son Dies Intestate Leaving Wife And Children, The Mother Has No Share: Karnataka High Court

“Avoid Conflicting Decisions in Bail Applications from Same FIR” – Supreme Court to High Courts

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant move towards ensuring uniformity in judicial decisions, the Supreme Court of India, while dismissing a special leave petition as withdrawn, made crucial observations on the necessity of maintaining consistency in bail decisions across High Courts.

In the case of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.15585 of 2023, the petitioner Rajpal sought to withdraw the petition. The Supreme Court, presided over by Justices C.T. Ravikumar and Sanjay Kumar, acceded to this request but took the opportunity to address a recurring issue concerning the handling of bail applications.

The Court noted, “We have to reiterate the concern of this Court on the lethargy in following the earlier orders in the matter of dealing with bail applications arising out of the same FIR to avoid conflicting decisions.” This observation highlights the Court’s stance on the need for consistency in judicial decision-making, especially in cases involving co-accused from the same FIR.

The judgment referenced a previous situation acknowledged by a three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court, which observed the inconsistency in bail decisions when similar cases from the same FIR were handled by different judges. The Bench had suggested that all matters pertaining to one FIR should be listed before the same Judge to ensure uniformity in orders.

Further cementing this approach, the Supreme Court has directed the Registrar (Judicial) of its Registry to communicate this order, along with the relevant order dated 31.07.2023 from SLP (Crl.) No.7203 of 2023, to the Registrar (Judicial) of all High Courts.

Date of Decision: 12th December 2023

RAJPAL VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN

 

Latest Legal News