Conviction Under Section 409 IPC Postulates Strict Proof Of Entrustment; Suspicion However Grave Cannot Substitute Proof: Supreme Court Criminal Prosecution Emanating From Past Matrimonial Relationship Ought Not To Linger After Divorce: Supreme Court Negligence Of Previous Counsel Not A Ground To Reopen Concluded Pre-Charge Evidence Under Section 311 CrPC: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Agreement To Sell Cannot Protect Tenant's Possession Under Section 53A Transfer Of Property Act: Delhi High Court Certified Copies Of Registered Sale Deeds Admissible As Secondary Evidence Without Proving Loss Of Original: Gauhati High Court Counsel Representing Deceased Party Must Inform Court Of Death Under Order XXII Rule 10-A CPC: J&K High Court Son Staying In Father's House Out Of Love And Affection Is A Mere Licensee, Cannot Challenge Father's Title: Delhi High Court Conviction For Murder Cannot Stand Where Single Blow Inflicted In Sudden Fight Without Premeditation: Uttarakhand High Court Inability To Trace Suppliers Or Buyers No Ground For Custodial Interrogation Once Recovery Is Effected: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Assemble Peacefully To Celebrate Association Anniversary Is A Fundamental Right; Unlawful Assembly Per Se Not An Offence: Madras High Court Marriage Photographs Can Be Relied Upon To Estimate Quantity Of Gold Ornaments In Matrimonial Disputes: Kerala High Court POCSO Act Not Confined To Securing Convictions, Soul Of Law Lies In Preserving Childhood Dignity & Healing: Madras High Court Special Appeal Maintainable If Single Judge's Order Relates To Authority Acting Without Statutory Appellate Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court Recall Of Witness For Cross-Examination Permissible On Newly Framed Issue Post-Remand Even If Disposal Timeline Is Fixed: Karnataka High Court Litigant Cannot Overcome Law Of Limitation By Shifting Blame On Counsel Through Inconsistent Stands: Madras High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Preventive Detention Not Warranted If Person Can Be Dealt With Under Ordinary Laws; No Effort To Arrest In Pending Cases: Supreme Court Accused Languishing In Jail For 9 Years Deserves Bail; Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Violated: Supreme Court Custodial Death | Pendency Of Criminal Trial No Bar For Awarding Compensation Under Public Law Remedy: Gauhati High Court Suit For Possession Under Section 6 Specific Relief Act Barred If Filed Beyond Six Months Of Dispossession: Madras High Court Subsequent Purchaser Is Representative Of Judgment Debtor, Separate Suit Challenging Execution Sale Barred Under Section 47 CPC: Kerala High Court Statutory Bail Restrictions Melt Down When Pre-Trial Detention Is Prolonged & Trial Is Unlikely To Conclude Soon: Delhi High Court Failure To Apprise Accused Of Right Under Section 50 NDPS Act Vitiates Search & Recovery: J&K & Ladakh High Court Section 12(5) Arbitration Act Inapplicable To Proceedings Commenced Before 2015 Amendment; Executing Court Can't Apply Neutrality Norms Retrospectively: Punjab & Haryana High Court Banks Can Share Sale Proceeds Of Secured Assets Outside Liquidation Estate With Homebuyers Under Compromise Agreement: Kerala High Court Election Disputes Must Be Resolved Expeditiously; Long Stays Render Adjudication A Mockery Of Justice: Madras High Court Delhi High Court Suspends LOC, Permits Businessman To Travel Abroad For Healthcare Conferences; Cites Roots In Society & Past Compliance Section 138 NI Act Complaint Not Maintainable By Third Party Who Is Neither Payee Nor Holder In Due Course: Allahabad High Court

Prima Facie Case Against Accused Paramount in Anticipatory Bail Decisions: Punjab and Haryana High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Punjab and Haryana delivered a significant judgment today in the case of Sunita vs. State of Punjab (CRM-M-22248-2023), underscoring the importance of the prima facie case against an accused while considering applications for anticipatory bail.

Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi, presiding over the matter, rejected the anticipatory bail application of Sunita, who was implicated in an FIR alleging fraud and cheating in connection with a failed matrimonial alliance. The FIR, lodged at Police Station Garhshankar, District Hoshiarpur, accused Sunita and others of deceitfully obtaining large sums of money under the guise of arranging a marriage with promises of settling abroad.

In his decision, Justice Bedi emphasized, “The first and foremost thing the Court hearing the anticipatory bail application is to consider is the prima facie case against the accused.” This observation comes as a pivotal legal standpoint in the backdrop of anticipatory bail jurisprudence.

Sunita’s counsel argued that she was falsely implicated, stating that the financial transactions were strictly between the complainant’s family and the prospective groom. In contrast, the State and complainant’s counsel pointed to a confessional statement from Sunita’s co-accused husband, alongside recovery of gifts, arguing that these substantiated the charges against her.

The Court, while acknowledging these submissions, concluded that the prima facie evidence against Sunita was substantial. Justice Bedi further noted that the grant of regular bail to the co-accused husband did not automatically entitle Sunita to anticipatory bail. “Merely because Dilwar Ram has been granted the concession of regular is not a ground to grant the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner as the offence stands prima facie established,” he added.

Date of Decision: 29th November 2023

SUNITA VS STATE OF PUNJAB

 

Latest Legal News