Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     When Two Accused Face Identical Charges, One Cannot Be Convicted While the Other is Acquitted: Supreme Court Emphasizes Principle of Parity in Acquittal    |     Supreme Court Limits Interim Protection for Financial Institutions, Modifies Order on FIRs Filed by Borrowers    |     Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail in Methamphetamine Case After Delay in Chemical Analysis Report    |     No Sign of Recent Intercourse; No Injury Was Found On Her Body Or Private Parts: Gauhati High Court Acquits Two In Gang Rape Case    |     Failure to Disclose Relationship with Key Stakeholder Led to Setting Aside of Arbitral Award: Gujarat High Court    |     Strict Compliance with UAPA's 7-Day Timeline for Sanctions is Essential:  Supreme Court    |     PAT Teachers Entitled to Regularization from 2014, Quashes Prospective Regularization as Arbitrary: Himachal Pradesh High Court    |     Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Anonymity Protections for Victims in Sensitive Cases: Right to Privacy Prevails Over Right to Information    |     Certified Copy of Will Admissible Under Registration Act, 1908: Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea for Production of Original Will    |     Injuries on Non-Vital Parts Do Not Warrant Conviction for Attempt to Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Modifies Conviction Under Section 307 IPC to Section 326 IPC    |     Classification Based on Wikipedia Data Inadmissible; Tribunal to Reassess Using Actual Financial Records: PH High Court Orders Reconsideration of Wage Dispute    |     Mere Delay in Initiation Does Not Justify Reduction of Damages: Jharkhand High Court on Provident Fund Defaults    |     Legatee Can Continue Suit Without Probate, But Decree Contingent on Probate Approval: Orissa High Court    |     An Award that Shocks the Conscience of the Court Cannot Stand, Especially When Public Money is Involved: Calcutta HC Reduces Quantum by Half    |     Trademark Transaction Within Territoriality Principle Subject to Indian Tax Laws: Bombay High Court Dismisses Hindustan Unilever's Petition on Non-Deduction of TDS    |     Concealment of Material Facts Bars Relief under Article 226: SC Reprimands Petitioners for Lack of Bonafides    |     Without Determination of the Will's Genuineness, Partition is Impossible: Supreme Court on Liberal Approach to Pleading Amendments    |     Candidates Cannot Challenge a Selection Process After Participating Without Protest : Delhi High Court Upholds ISRO's Administrative Officer Recruitment    |    

Bail Application Scrutiny: Judicial Discretion Requires Cogent Reasons in Heinous Offences – Karnataka High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark decision today, the High Court of Karnataka, led by The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.Vishwajith Shetty, set a new precedent in the judicial approach to bail applications, especially in cases involving serious offenses. The court overturned a bail order, emphasizing the necessity for detailed reasoning and strict adherence to legal principles in such matters.

The case, arising from a criminal petition filed under Section 439(2) of the Cr.PC, sought to cancel the bail granted to the accused in a murder case. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Shetty, in his judgment, highlighted the need for rigorous examination in successive bail applications, particularly when previous applications were rejected without any significant change in circumstances.

Justice Shetty's observation, "It is trite that the courts are required to record reasons while granting bail in cases where heinous offences are involved," underscored the judicial responsibility in granting bail. This statement reflects the court's commitment to ensuring justice and due diligence in the judicial process.

The judgment also stressed the importance of adhering to the principles laid down by the Supreme Court regarding successive bail applications. The Hon’ble Justice pointed out the violation of these principles in the current case, where the accused had previously had multiple bail applications rejected.

Date of Decision: 27 November 2023

MR MURALI V VS STATE OF KARNATAKA and Others

Similar News