IBC Moratorium Under Part III Does Not Shield Directors From Personal Criminal Liability In Cheque Bounce Cases U/S 138 NI: Supreme Court Section 138 NI Act Is Predominantly Criminal; IBC Moratorium Stays Recovery Of Compensation But Not Prosecution: Supreme Court Refers To 3-Judge Bench Bus Driver Not Negligent If Vehicle Moved Based On Conductor's Whistle; Not Expected To Look Back For Alighting Passengers: Supreme Court Compassionate Assistance Received By Widow Cannot Be Deducted To Negate Compensation Payable To Dependent Mother Ineligible For Such Benefit: Supreme Court Section 37 Jurisdiction Is A Narrowing Pyramid; Courts Should Not Reopen Settled Jurisdictional Issues: Supreme Court Arbitration Award Passed Without Court Leave During Pendency Of Suit Is Unenforceable Under 1940 Act: Supreme Court Notice In Mutation Proceedings Constitutes Constructive Notice Of Probate; Revocation Plea Barred By Limitation: Supreme Court Breach Of Position Limits Is A Regulatory Infraction, Not Automatic Market Fraud; Supreme Court Sets Aside Reliance RPL Disgorgement Order Mere Breach Of Position Limits Not 'Fraud' Under PFUTP Regulations Unless Manipulation Or Inducement Is Proven: Supreme Court SC Awards ₹11 Lakh Compensation To Convict For 24-Day Delay In Release; Says State Must 'Obey First, Appeal Later' Compensation For Village Fazalwas Land Acquisition No Longer Res Integra; Supreme Court Dismisses Enhancement Claim Citing Previous Precedent Uncommunicated Adverse Remarks Cannot Form Basis To Terminate Probationer; Violates Natural Justice: Supreme Court Employer Cannot Use 'Unsatisfactory Performance' As Guise To Bypass Disciplinary Inquiry For Misconduct: Supreme Court Statutory Body Cannot Act As Both Investigator And Judge; Adjudicatory Process Must Be Neutrally Conducted: Supreme Court Removal Of Mathadhipati Vitiated If Relied-Upon Documents Not Supplied; Service By Affixation On Seized Premises Is A Legal Absurdity: Supreme Court Serving Notice By Affixing It To Door Of Premises Already Seized By State Is A Legal Absurdity: Supreme Court Initiating Criminal Case After Final Settlement Of Loan Account Is An Abuse Of Process; Sanctity Of OTS Must Be Protected: Supreme Court Criminal Prosecution Under Sections 420 & 471 IPC Cannot Continue After Bank Loan Settlement Approved By DRT: Supreme Court RTE Act: Use Of 'Teacher' In Section 23 Shows Intent To Make TET Mandatory For In-Service Staff, Not Retrospective: Supreme Court Service Of Teachers Cannot Come At Cost Of Educational Future Of Children: Supreme Court Extends TET Deadline To 2028 Right To Know Biological Father Prevails Over Right To Privacy; DNA Test Can Be Ordered To Resolve Paternity: Supreme Court DNA | Child’s Right To Identity & Closure Outweighs Putative Father’s Right To Privacy In Paternity Disputes: Supreme Court Approver’s Testimony Doesn’t Require Corroboration Of Every Material Circumstance; Rule Of Prudence Requires Only Connecting Link To Accused: Supreme Court Conspirator Liable For All 'Reasonably Foreseeable' Crimes Committed By Others In Furtherance Of Conspiracy: Supreme Court Rent Enhancement Orders Under UP Rent Act Must Apply Retrospectively From Date Of Filing Application: Supreme Court High Court Can’t Enhance Rent Under Article 227 Based On Mere Statements Without Evidence; Power To Be Exercised Sparingly: Supreme Court Parrot Testimony | Verbatim Repetition Of Allegations In Child's Statement Indicates Tutoring; POCSO Complaint Filed As 'Counter-Blast' Liable To Be Quashed: Supreme Court Matrimonial Disputes Often Witness Vague POCSO Allegations To Settle Personal Scores: Supreme Court Quashes Case Against Husband & In-Laws

Bombay High Court Grants Bail to Divya Ashok Pahuja in Fake Encounter Case After Almost 7 Years in Custody

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent Judgement , the Bombay High Court, in a judgment delivered by Justice Prakash D. Naik, granted bail to Divya Ashok Pahuja in a high-profile fake encounter case. The court observed, "An attempt has been made to strike a balance between the appellant's right to lead evidence of its choice and establish the charges beyond any doubt and simultaneously the respondent's rights guaranteed under Part III of our Constitution have been well protected."

Divya Ashok Pahuja, who has been in custody for nearly 7 years, had filed a bail application (No. 354 of 2023) in connection with the case registered under Sections 302, 193, 182, 201, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, as well as Sections 325 and 327 of the Arms Act. The case pertains to a fake encounter involving the deceased Sandeep Gadoli.

The court considered various factors in its decision, including the prolonged period of incarceration, the lack of progress in the trial, and the fact that the applicant was a woman with no criminal antecedents. It noted that the applicant was in custody for a substantial period, having been arrested on July 14, 2016. The court further highlighted that despite previous orders to expedite the trial, there had been no significant progress.

Justice Naik also emphasized the importance of timely trials and the protection of personal liberty. The court referred to previous Supreme Court judgments that emphasized the need to balance the seriousness of charges with the period of custody and the likelihood of trial completion. It further underscored that the denial of speedy justice posed a threat to public confidence in the administration of justice.

Considering these factors, the court granted bail to Divya Ashok Pahuja, subject to certain conditions. These conditions include executing a personal recognizance bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with sureties, reporting to the local police station once a month, attending court hearings regularly, providing contact details and a residential address to the trial court, not tampering with evidence, and not leaving the country without court permission.

This judgment by the Bombay High Court serves as a significant development in the case, bringing relief to Divya Ashok Pahuja after a prolonged period of incarceration. The decision underscores the importance of ensuring timely trials and protecting the rights of individuals held in custody, striking a balance between the gravity of charges and the period of custody.

Date of Decision: 20th June, 2023

Divya Ashok Pahuja   vs State Of Maharashtra 

Latest Legal News