Law Does Not Countenance Resurrection Of Stale Claims Through Inventive Drafting: Karnataka High Court Rejects 20-Year-Old Partition Dispute CPC Provisions Cannot Be Used to Transfer Consumer Complaints Across States: NCDRC Invokes Section 62 to End Forum-Shifting Ordeal in Nirmal Spinning Mills Case FSSA Provisions Prevail Over PFA Act In Cases Of Overlapping Jurisdiction, Prosecution Under Old Act Impermissible: J&K High Court Motive Pales Into Significance When Direct Ocular Evidence Establishes Crime; Enmity Is A Double-Edged Sword: Allahabad High Court Plaintiff Cannot Succeed Merely On Weakness Of Defence; Initial Burden To Prove Claim Rests On Claimant: Madras High Court Witness Threats Noted By Higher Courts Disentitle Convict To Suspension Of Sentence: Gujarat High Court Family Court Orders Must Be Enforced Immediately, Pendency Of Applications No Excuse For Disobedience: Delhi High Court 'Fraud And Justice Never Dwell Together': Karnataka High Court Reverses Order To Grant Land Based On Fabricated Records Development Authority Competent To Sanction Land Use Conversion From Residential To Nursing Home If Permitted Under Master Plan & Zoning Regulations: Allahabad High Court Notification Changing Import Policy From 'Free' To 'Restricted' Operative Only From Exact Time Of Publication In E-Gazette: Delhi High Court On Name Of Protection of the Complainer Excluding Relevant Defence Evidence in Sexual Offences Trials May Breach Fair Trial Rights: UK Supreme Court Boundaries In Sale Deed Prevail Over Discrepancy In Property Description; Adverse Possession Begins From Date Of Hostile Notice: Punjab & Haryana HC Supreme Court of UK Upholds HMRC Decision: Professional Fees Incurred by Investment Holding Company Are Capital Expenditure Criminal Law Cannot Be Used To Silence Citizens Questioning Legality Of Police Action: Madras High Court Quashes Obstruction Case Punjab & Haryana High Court Directs Centre To Treat Ashok Khemka As Empaneled For Future Assignments, Says Denying Relaxation Granted To Peers Is Discriminatory Section 34 Court Cannot Substitute Arbitrator’s Plausible View With Its Own; Not Bound By Technical Rules Of Evidence Act: Madras High Court Article 227 Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Reopen Decrees Finalized Four Decades Ago: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Challenge To 1985 Order Daughter Has No Right To Inherit Agricultural Land If Succession Opened Before 2005 HSA Amendment: Delhi High Court Rejects Plaint Indian Trust Act Inapplicable To Public Religious Endowments; Sale Of Charity Property Without HR&CE Commissioner's Permission Void: Madras High Court Supreme Court Clarifies Status of Collateral Warranties Under Construction Contracts FIR Quashed Against Newsclick: PMLA Proceedings Cannot Stand Alone Without A Predicate Offence, Rules Delhi High Court Assessee Claiming TDS Exemption On "Reimbursement" To Non-Residents Must Obtain Mandatory Tax Determination Under Section 195(2): Madras High Court

IF Bail Was Given Without Assigning Any Reason Bail Order Not Sustainable: Allahabad HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Recently, the Allahabad High Court ruled that if bail is granted to a similarly situated defendant for no apparent reason, then bail should not be granted based solely on the principle of equality.

The Bench of Justice Sameer Jain made these remarks in a murder case involving Manish's bail application. Manish and his parents are accused of dousing a woman in kerosene and then setting her on fire.

According to the victim's dying declaration, the accused and his family dragged the victim into their home on the day of the incident and then set her on fire.

On the other hand, the defence attorney for the defendant argued that the allegations stated in the FIR and the dying declaration are false, and that during the investigation it was determined that the allegations against the defendant and his family are false, and a final report was submitted.

In addition, it was asserted that under the SSP's direction, additional investigations were conducted and a charge sheet was filed against the accused.

In addition, it was argued that the dying declaration as a tutored one and the fact that the other co-accused have been granted bail by the Coordinate Bench are grounds for granting bail in this case.

After hearing the arguments, the court noted that there are specific allegations against the accused in the dying declaration, and it was also noted that the co-accused (one Mintu @ Amit) was granted bail by the coordinate Bench of the Court solely on the basis of the arguments advanced by his counsel, and the same was true for the other accused as well.

In this case, the court ruled that parity cannot be the sole criterion for granting bail and determining whether bail should be granted to other co-defendants.

The court also noted that the deceased made specific allegations against the applicant and the other defendants.

Accordingly, the court denied bail to the defendant and opined that in this instance, bail cannot be granted on the basis of equality.

D.D: 22 JUNE 2022

Manish Versus State of U.P.

Latest Legal News