Subsequent Declaration Of Juvenility Does Not Vitiate Conviction On Merits: Supreme Court Borrowers Cannot Ignore Bank Accounting Systems And Suspense Accounts To Claim Arbitrary Reductions In Loan Dues: Supreme Court Re-employed Judicial Officers Cannot Claim 6th Pay Commission Scales: Supreme Court Supreme Court Slams High Court For Erroneously Exercising Review Jurisdiction On 'Mistaken Notion', Restores Employee's ACP Benefits Trademark Infringement: Defendant Can Cross-Examine Plaintiff On Use Of Brand Name Even If Written Statement Is Not On Record: Supreme Court 'Interest And Welfare Of Child Would Be Best Served': Supreme Court Invokes Parens Patriae In Contempt Plea; Revokes Own Custody Order Mere Absence From MCA Records Cannot Absolve Accused Under Section 138 NI Act If Prima Facie Role Is Shown: Punjab & Haryana High Court Incomplete Or Defective Real Estate Application Cannot Claim Deemed Registration Under Section 5(2) Of RERA Act: Orissa High Court Mere Criminal Antecedents Cannot Justify Invoking 'Organized Crime' Offence Under Section 111 BNS Without Fulfilling Statutory Ingredients: Madhya Pradesh High Court 'Testator's Character & Prior Gifts Justify Unequal Distribution': Madras High Court Upholds Holographic Will Minority Status Cannot Arrest Limitation Period For Appeal If Minor Was Represented By Natural Guardian In Original Proceedings: Madhya Pradesh High Court Mere Admission Of Property Boundaries In Family Partition Deeds Destroys Coparceners' Claim That Land Remains Joint Ancestral Property: Karnataka High Court Mesne Profits Must Reflect Open Market Letting Value Rather Than Static Contractual Rates: Delhi High Court Law Graduates Who Fail To Clear AIBE Within Two Years Cannot Practice In Any Court, Tribunal Or Revenue Authority: Allahabad High Court Bombay High Court Slams 'Growing Tendency' To Bypass GST Appeals, Says 'Natural Justice' Not A Blanket Excuse For Writ Petitions Proportionate Cost Only Can Be Awarded On Decreed Amount, Not On Total Plaint Valuation: Kerala High Court

Gender No Ground for Bail in Serious Offences: Supreme Court of India Rejects Bail Appeal of Chhattisgarh Deputy Secretary

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India today dismissed the bail appeal of Saumya Chaurasia, the Deputy Secretary in the Office of the Chief Minister of Chhattisgarh, in connection with her arrest under charges of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) and the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The apex court, led by Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M. Trivedi, upheld the High Court of Chhattisgarh's decision to reject her bail application, stating, "No compelling reason for granting bail observed," as noted in paragraph 30 of the judgment.

The bench criticized the appellant for attempting to mislead the court by presenting incorrect statements in the Special Leave Petition (SLP), aimed at challenging the order of the High Court. The judgment, in paragraph 12, stated, "There was a bold attempt made by and on behalf of the appellant to misrepresent the facts for challenging the impugned order."

Further elaborating on the need for accurate representation in legal proceedings, the judgment emphasized the responsibility of advocates in ensuring the sanctity of legal processes. "It is unbelievable that the battery of lawyers... did not notice the apparent fact that when the chargesheet and cognizance order were not in existence before the High Court when the arguments were concluded and the judgment was reserved, non-consideration of the same by the High Court could not be made the basis for challenging the said order in the SLP before this Court," the court observed in paragraph 13.

The court also discussed the discretion under Section 45 of the PMLA regarding the granting of bail to women, highlighting that the involvement of the appellant in serious offences and the evidence against her did not warrant bail despite her gender. The judgment reads, "There is sufficient evidence collected... to prima facie come to the conclusion that the appellant... was actively involved in the offence of Money Laundering as defined in Section 3 of the PMLA" (paragraph 25).

This ruling reinforces the importance of integrity and accuracy in legal representations and the need for the legal community to maintain high standards of professionalism, especially when dealing with cases of significant public interest.

The Supreme Court has also imposed a cost of Rs. 1 lakh on the appellant, to be deposited before the Supreme Court Legal Services Authority within two weeks. The judgment, in its finality and depth, sets a precedent for future cases involving money laundering and the professional conduct of advocates in India's highest court.

Date of Decision: 14th December 2023

SAUMYA CHAURASIA VS DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

Latest Legal News