Prolonged Pre-Trial Detention and Right to Liberty Cannot Be Ignored” - Punjab & Haryana High Court Emphasizes Bail as the Rule Taxation Law | Andhra Pradesh High Court Rules Hotel’s Expenditures on Carpets, Mattresses, and Lampshades are Deductible as Current Expenditures Orissa High Court Upholds Disengagement of Teacher for Unauthorized Absence and Suppression of Facts In Disciplined Forces, Transfers are an Administrative Necessity; Judicial Interference is Limited to Cases of Proven Mala Fide: Patna High Court Act Of Judge, When Free From Oblique Motive, Cannot Be Questioned: Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes Disciplinary Proceedings Against Additional Collector Registration Act | False Statements in Conveyance Documents Qualify for Prosecution Under Registration Act: Kerala High Court When Junior is Promoted, Senior’s Case Cannot be Deferred Unjustly: Karnataka High Court in Sealed Cover Promotion Dispute Medical Training Standards Cannot Be Lowered, Even for Disability’ in MBBS Admission Case: Delhi HC Suspicion, However Strong It May Be, Cannot Take Place Of Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Acquittal No Detention Order Can Rely on Grounds Already Quashed: High Court Sets Precedent on Preventive Detention Limits Tenant's Claims of Hardship and Landlord's Alternate Accommodations Insufficient to Prevent Eviction: Allahabad HC Further Custodial Detention May Not Be Necessary: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail in Murder Case Citing Lack of Specific Evidence High Court, As A Constitutional Court Of Record, Possesses The Inherent Power To Correct Its Own Record: Bombay High Court A Fresh Section 11 Arbitration Petition Without Liberty Granted at the Time of Withdrawal is Not Maintainable: Supreme Court; Principles of Order 23 CPC Applied Adult Sexual Predators Ought Not To Be Dealt With Leniency Or Extended Misplaced Sympathy: Sikkim High Court Retired Employee Entitled to Interest on Delayed Leave Encashment Despite Absence of Statutory Provision: Delhi HC Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Full Disability Pension and Service Element for Life to Army Veteran Taxation Law | Director Must Be Given Notice to Prove Lack of Negligence: Telangana High Court Quashes Order Against Director in Tax Recovery Case 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

No Strong Prima Facie Case Against Conditions Of Bail Being Violated: Supreme Court Upholds High Court's Bail Decision in Chandwa Police Attack Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a notable decision, the Supreme Court has upheld the Jharkhand High Court’s order granting bail to Mrityunjay Kumar Singh, linked with alleged terrorist activities and the killing of police personnel by CPI (Maoist). The apex court dismissed the appeal by the Union of India, which challenged the bail, citing insufficient grounds to reverse the High Court’s decision.

Legal Context and Brief: The challenge was rooted in the High Court’s decision dated January 30, 2023, which allowed Singh’s bail plea. The Union of India had contested this decision, fearing Singh might tamper with evidence or influence witnesses, given his alleged connections with terrorist activities and other criminal cases.

Facts and Issues: The case pertains to an attack on Chandwa police by CPI (Maoist) on November 22, 2019, resulting in four police casualties. The respondent, Mrityunjay Kumar Singh, was accused of supporting the Maoist group financially and logistically. The National Investigation Agency (NIA) charged him and several others with multiple severe offenses, leading to his initial bail rejection by a Special Judge.

Court’s Assessment: The Supreme Court noted that the High Court’s decision to grant bail was based on the lack of direct evidence linking Singh to the crime scene and the absence of any violation of previously set bail conditions. The Court referenced past precedents emphasizing the necessity of a judicial balance between the presumption of innocence and the nature of the accusations.

Key Observations: Evidence and Previous Acquittals: The apex court highlighted that previous acquittals and bail grants in other cases significantly weakened the Union of India’s argument.

Judicial Reasoning: The Court underscored that detaining individuals on a presumption of guilt without a strong evidential basis is inappropriate, stressing that decisions at the bail stage should not influence the trial’s outcome.

Future Compliance: The Court left room for the prosecution to seek bail cancellation should there be future violations of the bail conditions, asserting that such actions should be assessed independently.

Decision: The appeal was dismissed due to a lack of substantive grounds to reverse the High Court’s order, emphasizing the absence of bail condition violations as a significant factor.

Date of Decision: May 10, 2024.

UNION OF INDIA vs. MRITYUNJAY KUMAR SINGH @ MRITYUNJAY @ SONU SINGH,

Similar News