Limitation | Delay Condonation Cannot Be An Act Of Generosity: Supreme Court Refuses To Condone 31-Year Delay To Challenge Decree Sentence Suspension In Murder Cases Only Under Exceptional Circumstances; Presumption Of Innocence Erased Upon Conviction: Supreme Court Inquiry Commission Report Cannot Be Used For Disciplinary Action If Statutory Right To Cross-Examine Denied: Gauhati High Court Use Of Trademark On Website Accessible In India Constitutes Domestic Use, Geo-Blocking Mandatory For Territorial Restrictions: Delhi High Court Civil Court Jurisdiction To Interfere With DRT Proceedings Is Absolutely Barred Even For Third Parties: Madras High Court Adding a Prefix Can’t Erase Deceptive Similarity – Delhi High Court Orders Removal of ‘ARUN’ from Trademark ‘AiC ARUN’ Cannot Resile From Mediated Settlement After Taking Benefits: Supreme Court Quashes Wife's DV Case, Grants Divorce Absolute Indemnity Obligation Triggers Immediately Upon Court-Directed Deposit, Not On Final Appeal: Supreme Court Magistrate Directing Investigation Under Section 156(3) CrPC Only Requires Prima Facie Satisfaction Of Cognizable Offence: Supreme Court Cancellation Of Sale Deed Under Specific Relief Act Not A Pre-Condition To Initiate Criminal Case For Forgery: Supreme Court Amalgamated Company Cannot Claim Set-Off Of Predecessor's Losses Under Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act Without Specific Statutory Provision: Supreme Court Overlapping Split Chargesheets May Raise Double Jeopardy Concerns, Supreme Court Notes While Granting Bail To Former Jharkhand Minister Supreme Court Grants Bail To Convicted Ex-Jharkhand Minister Facing Overlapping Prosecutions From Split Chargesheets Electricity Act Appellate Authority Is A Quasi-Judicial Body Subject To High Court’s Supervisory Jurisdiction: Madhya Pradesh High Court Mere Discrepancy In Date Of Birth Across Certificates Doesn't Amount To Fraud If No Undue Advantage Is Derived: Allahabad High Court Interest Earned On Funds Temporarily Parked Pending Project Deployment Cannot Be Taxed As 'Income From Other Sources': Delhi High Court Reference Court Cannot Set Aside Collector's Award Or Remand Matter For Fresh Determination: Allahabad High Court Administrative Transfer Causing Revenue Loss Defies Court Process: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Ferry Ghat Handover Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka High 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