Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Criminal Antecedents Disentitles Accused To Discretionary Relief Of Bail: Orissa High Court Section 311 CrPC | Delay Or Absence Of Examination-In-Chief No Bar To Summon Material Witnesses: Allahabad High Court Revenue Authorities Lack Jurisdiction To Declare Genuineness Of Wills Or Validity Of Settlement Deeds; Parties Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Demand Of Bribe Is Sine Qua Non For Conviction Under PC Act, Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money Not Enough: Bombay High Court 'Promotion Effected Long Ago Not To Be Disturbed': Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order Quashing 13-Year-Old Promotion; Holds 'Laying Rules' Directory Not Mandatory "Mere Oral Assertion Or 'Data Loss' Letter Not Enough To Prove Driving Licence Validity; Owner Has Strict Duty To Ensure Renewal": Supreme Court Reinstates Insurer's Non-Liability, Applies 'Pay & Recover' Principle "Zero Tolerance To Corruption": Supreme Court Reinstates FIRs Against Karnataka Cops, Slams High Court For 'Mini-Trial' & Exceeding S.482 CrPC Powers ‘Ancillary Services Don't Override Carriage’: Supreme Court Upholds 7.5% Presumptive Income For Cruise Operators Under Section 44B IT Act, Rejects Revenue's Higher Tax Claim Division Bench Refuses To Quash FIR, Holds It Cannot Nullify Single Judge's Final Order Directing Registration Of Case: Allahabad High Court High Court Leave Under Clause XII Doesn't Protect Transferred Suits; Section 16 CPC Strictly Applies To City Civil Court In 'Suits For Land': Bombay High Court Joint Account Holder Who Didn't Sign The Dishonoured Cheque Cannot Be Prosecuted Under Section 138 NI Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Suits Cannot Be Consolidated If Parties, Properties, And Causes Of Action Are Different: Telangana High Court P&H High Court Halts All Construction In Mohali's Shivalik Foothills Over Failure To Demarcate 'Forest Land', Bars Land Sale No Embargo On Issuing Single Statutory Notice Under Section 138 NI Act For Multiple Dishonoured Cheques: Orissa High Court District Collector Has No Jurisdiction Under CrPC To Order Reopening Of Investigation Or Recall Of Closure Report: Madhya Pradesh High Court No Exclusive Monopoly Over Geographical Term 'Malabar' In Isolation; Protection Limited To Registered Composite Marks: Kerala High Court Person In 'De Facto' Control Is A Promoter Under Companies Act Even If Designated As Professional Director: Karnataka High Court Supreme Court Urges Mandatory Animal Tagging, Strict Enforcement of Gaushala Laws To Tackle Stray Cattle Crisis; Holds Owners Accountable "Don't Render Victims Remediless": Supreme Court Slams High Court For Dismissing Plea Over Stray Bull Death, Awards ₹15 Lakh Compensation Supreme Court Red-Flags 'Unregulated Shadow Work' of Private Investigators, Calls For Legislative Overhaul on Digital Evidence & Privacy Rights 125 CrPC | Wife 'Not Entitled To Interim Maintenance If Adultery Established Ex Facie': Supreme Court Evidence Against Absconder Invalid Without Prior S.299 CrPC Order: SC Acquits Murder Accused Ad Valorem Court Fee Mandatory For Section 54 Appeals Challenging Land Acquisition Awards: Supreme Court

Judicial Discretion Must Be Exercised Judiciously, Cautiously: Gujarat High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Lady Accused with Two-Month-Old Child

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment today, the Gujarat High Court granted anticipatory bail to Amanpreet Gurkamalsinh Kaur, a woman accused of multiple offences including those under the Indian Penal Code, the Explosives Act, and the Essential Commodities Act. The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar stated, "It is equally incumbent upon the Court to exercise its discretion judiciously, cautiously, and strictly in compliance with the basic principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court."

The court took into account several factors before granting bail. Justice Suthar observed, "I have considered the following aspects: The applicant is a lady accused having a two-months-old child; day-to-day affairs of Noor Enterprise are being managed by the husband of the applicant; nothing is required to be recovered or discovered from the applicant; the applicant is ready and willing to join the investigation."

Counsel for the accused, Mr. ND Nanavaty, along with Mr. Ruchit J Vyas, argued that the applicant had not actively participated in any alleged criminal activities and was merely the proprietor of Noor Enterprise. She also has a two-month-old child, making custodial interrogation unnecessary.

The Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. Hardik Mehta, vehemently opposed the bail application, stating that the accused was the proprietor of Noor Enterprise and thus responsible for its activities. He insisted on the necessity of custodial interrogation for effective investigation.

Despite the opposition, Justice Suthar granted bail on specific conditions, including a personal bond of Rs. 10,000 and presence at the concerned police station on specified dates. The judge also clarified, "Despite this order, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to apply to the competent Magistrate, for police remand of the applicant."

The decision references several cases, including the Apex Court's decisions in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), as guidelines for granting anticipatory bail.

Legal analysts state that this decision once again underscores the importance of judicious and cautious use of judicial discretion in bail matters, particularly when it comes to vulnerable sections of society.

Date of Decision:29 September 2023

AMANPREET GURKAMALSINH KAUR vs STATE OF GUJARAT

Latest Legal News