High Court, As A Constitutional Court Of Record, Possesses The Inherent Power To Correct Its Own Record: Bombay High Court High Court of Uttarakhand Acquits Defendants in High-Profile Murder Case, Cites Lack of Evidence In Cases of Financial Distress, Imposing A Mandatory Deposit Under Negotiable Instruments Act May Jeopardize Appellant’s Right To Appeal: Rajasthan High Court Patna High Court Acquits Accused, Questions “Capacity of Victim to Make Coherent Statement” with 100% Burn Injuries High Court of Himachal Pradesh Dismisses Bail Plea in ₹200 Crore Scholarship Scam: Rajdeep Singh Case Execution of Conveyance Ends Arbitration Clause; Appeal for Arbitration Rejected: Bombay High Court Allahabad High Court Denies Tax Refund for Hybrid Vehicle Purchased Before Electric Vehicle Exemption Policy Entering A Room with Someone Cannot, By Any Stretch Of Imagination, Be Considered Consent For Sexual Intercourse: Bombay High Court No Specific Format Needed for Dying Declaration, Focus on Mental State and Voluntariness: Calcutta High Court Delhi High Court Allows Direct Appeal Under DVAT Act Without Tribunal Reference for Pre-2005 Tax Periods NDPS | Mere Registration of Cases Does Not Override Presumption of Innocence: Himachal Pradesh High Court No Previous Antecedents and No Communal Tension: High Court Grants Bail in Caste-Based Abuse Case Detention of Petitioner Would Amount to Pre-Trial Punishment: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail in Dowry Harassment Case Loss of Confidence Must Be Objectively Proven to Deny Reinstatement: Kerala High Court Reinstates Workman After Flawed Domestic Enquiry Procedural lapses should not deny justice: Andhra High Court Enhances Compensation in Motor Accident Case Canteen Subsidy Constitutes Part of Dearness Allowance Under EPF Act: Gujarat High Court Concurrent Findings Demonstrate Credibility – Jharkhand High Court Affirms Conviction in Cheating Case 125 Cr.P.C | Financial responsibility towards dependents cannot be shirked due to personal obligations: Punjab and Haryana High Court

Judicial Consistency is Key: Allahabad High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Allahabad High Court has granted anticipatory bail to Abhishek Yadav, highlighting the necessity of consistency in judicial decisions. The judgment by Justice Krishan Pahal scrutinized earlier contradictory rulings and reinforced the importance of judicial integrity and fairness, especially in matters involving personal liberty.

Case Background: The anticipatory bail application was filed by Abhishek Yadav in connection with Case Crime No.138 of 2023, involving charges under Sections 147, 323, 336, 308, 504, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. The case originated from an altercation on June 7, 2023, escalating into a confrontation at the informant's residence on June 9, 2023, resulting in injuries to Shogendra Singh and Ishu Singh.

Inconsistency in Judicial Orders: Justice Pahal noted the inconsistency in orders passed by the same judicial officer on similar anticipatory bail applications in the same case. "Judicial decisions must be uniform to maintain the integrity and trust in the legal system," Justice Pahal stated. The court criticized the lack of reasoning in differentiating the rejection of Abhishek Yadav’s bail application from those granted to co-accused on similar grounds.

Credibility of Medical Evidence: The court addressed the medical evidence presented, which was allegedly procured in collusion with a private hospital. Despite these claims, the injuries sustained by the victims were acknowledged, but the lack of bony injuries was a factor in the decision.

Principles of Parity: Emphasizing the importance of parity, the court observed, "The applicant’s case was at par with the co-accused who had been granted anticipatory bail. Inconsistent orders undermine public confidence in the judiciary." The principle of treating similarly situated individuals equally was underscored.

Legal Reasoning: The judgment drew extensively on the principles laid out in landmark cases, including Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI, highlighting the need for consistency in judicial decisions. "Uniformity and certainty in the decisions of the court are the foundations of judicial dispensation," Justice Pahal asserted.

Quotes from the Judgment: Justice Pahal remarked, "The fairness of the judicial proceedings is pivotal for the faith of the litigants. Inconsistent judicial orders can lead to discrimination among accused persons, especially when the facts and circumstances are similar or identical."

Conclusion: The judgment granting anticipatory bail to Abhishek Yadav reaffirms the judiciary's commitment to maintaining fairness and consistency in its decisions. By addressing the inconsistencies in previous orders and emphasizing the principles of parity, the Allahabad High Court has reinforced the importance of judicial integrity. This decision is expected to influence future bail applications, ensuring that personal liberty is protected under a fair and predictable legal system.

Date of Decision: June 4, 2024

Abhishek Yadav @ Laloo vs. State of U.P.

Similar News