Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

'Strong Reasons' Needed for Bail Cancellation: High Court of Gujarat Upholds Anticipatory Bail in Rs.90 Lakhs Fraud Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Gujarat, presided over by the Honorable Mr. Justice J.C. Doshi, has upheld the anticipatory bail granted to Rakesh @ Govind Banwarilal Dhandhariya in a case involving allegations of financial fraud amounting to Rs.90 Lakhs. The court emphasized the necessity of "strong reasons" for the cancellation of bail, distinguishing between the refusal to grant bail and the cancellation of bail after it has been granted.

In the case titled Rajnish S/O Sawal Lilha Versus Rakesh @ Govind Banwarilal Dhandhariya & 1 other(s), the petitioner sought the cancellation of anticipatory bail, which was previously granted by the 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat. The petitioner argued that the bail was granted on untenable grounds without adequately considering the respondent's past offenses and the significant amount involved in the alleged fraud.

However, in its order dated February 1, 2024, the court observed, "Cancellation of bail requires strong reasons; the court cannot cancel the bail mechanically." This observation was in line with the principles laid down in several precedents, such as Bhagirathsinh S/O Mahipat Singh vs State Of Gujarat and Bhagwan Singh v Dilip Kumar @ Deepu @ Depak.

The respondent's defense highlighted his acquittal in related cheque cases, asserting that there had been no misuse of the granted bail and no breach of its conditions. This stance was crucial in the court's decision to dismiss the petition for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

The court referred to the decision in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v/s. State of Maharashtra and Ors., underscoring that the petitioner failed to present convincing reasons to demonstrate that the impugned order was arbitrary or whimsical.

In conclusion, the High Court's decision to dismiss the petition for cancellation of anticipatory bail reinforces the judiciary's cautious approach in handling bail matters, particularly in emphasizing the importance of safeguarding personal liberty while simultaneously ensuring that justice is served. The ruling sets a precedent for future cases where the cancellation of bail is sought, mandating the presence of substantial and compelling reasons for such actions.

 Date: 01/02/2024

 RAJNISH VS RAKESH @ GOVIND BANWARILAL DHANDHARIYA

 

Latest Legal News