Triple Riding On Motorcycle Not Automatic Proof Of Contributory Negligence; High Court Can Enhance Award Even Without Cross-Appeal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Statutory Power To Lay Electricity Lines Prevails Over Private Land Claims; Landowners Entitled To Compensation, Not Obstruction: Bombay High Court Beer & Whisky Are Allied/Cognate Goods; Use Of Identical Mark For Spirits Infringes 'Godfather' Beer Trademark: Delhi High Court Minimum Percentile Fixed By Indian Nursing Council For B.Sc. Nursing Admissions Must Be Strictly Adhered To; Cannot Be Diluted Without Approval: Calcutta High Court Bride Not Expected To Keep All Gold In Personal Custody In Matrimonial Home; Entrustment To Husband Presumed: Kerala High Court Default Imprisonment Not Additional Punishment But Coercive Measure To Secure Fine; Cannot Become 'De Facto' Debtors' Prison: Karnataka High Court Mahant Is Only A Custodian Of Deity’s Property, Assets Gifted For Temple Maintenance Belong To Public Trust: Gujarat High Court Pendency Of Criminal Antecedents Alone Not A Ground To Deny Bail: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail In Abduction Case After 3-Year Delay In FIR Beer Falls Under ‘IMFL’ Category; No Obligation To Collect TCS On Sales Prior To June 2003: Telangana High Court Dismissal From Service For Negligence Without Proved Misappropriation Is Disproportionate: Orissa High Court Merit In A Case Does Not Justify Disregarding Statutory Delay: NCDRC Upholds Dismissal Of Star Health's Appeal Filed With 442-Day Delay Limitation Period Under Section 34(3) Arbitration Act Commences Only From Receipt Of Signed Copy Of Award: Madhya Pradesh High Court Government Employee Not Eligible For Regular Promotion During Pendency Of Vigilance Proceeding: Orissa High Court Arrest Warrants Against Directors Under Section 72 CP Act Should Be Last Resort; Proper Procedure Must Be Followed: NCDRC

"One Cannot Apply For One Bail Order to All Subsequent Cases": Supreme Court Dismisses Bail Applications in Multi-Jurisdictional Offences

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling today, the Supreme Court of India dismissed the bail applications filed by accused nos. 5 and 6 in a case involving multiple offences and jurisdictions. The bench, comprising Justices A. S. Bopanna and M. M. Sundresh, emphasized that "one cannot apply one bail order to all other subsequent cases," directing the applicants to approach jurisdictional courts for bail.

The accused had sought bail for offences under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978. The applications were filed in connection with FIR No. RC-BD1/2014E004-CBI/BS&FC/New Delhi and Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 326 of 2023. The applicants, being Directors at the relevant time, were implicated in a case where the amount siphoned off exceeds 40 thousand crores.

The applicants argued that they have been in jail for over seven years and acted in good faith. They also claimed that there was no evidence of tampering with witnesses or non-cooperation with the investigating agency. On the other hand, the Additional Solicitor General argued against bail, citing the large number of investors duped and the international scope of the financial trail.

The Court noted that the applicants had sought an "omnibus relief" by filing for bail in all pending cases across different jurisdictions and investigating agencies. The bench stated, "We are not willing to go into the merits of the submissions made as we are in agreement with the submissions made by the learned Additional Solicitor General that the applicants will have to approach the jurisdictional courts, instead of seeking an omnibus relief before this Court."

The Court dismissed the bail applications and the writ petition but extended the interim bail granted to the applicants for a period of three months. This extension aims to facilitate the applicants in seeking bail from the jurisdictional courts. The Court made it clear that future applications for bail should be disposed of on their own merits, "without being influenced by this order."

Date of Decision: September 5, 2023

PACL vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION      

Latest Legal News