Minor in Live-In Relationship Deemed 'Child in Need of Care' by High Court, Protection Ordered Under Juvenile Justice Act Cheque Signed, Sealed, and Bounced – No Escape from Liability: Delhi High Court Right to Defend Includes Right to Inspect Documents: Calcutta High Court Overrules Trial Court's Rejection of Inspection Petition Court Cannot Tinker with Finalized Consolidation Scheme Under Section 42: Punjab and Haryana High Court Remarriage During Appeal Period is Risky, But Not Void: Andhra Pradesh High Court State Cannot Sleep Over Its Rights: Supreme Court Criticizes Odisha Government for Delayed Appeals in Pension Dispute “Both Hands Intact” Rule is a Relic of the Past: Supreme Court Grants MBBS Admission to Disabled Student Terminal Benefits and Family Pension Alone Do Not Bar Compassionate Appointment, But Financial Distress Must Be Proven – Supreme Court Cruelty Under Section 498A IPC Is Not Limited to Dowry Harassment: Supreme Court Right to Speedy Trial Cannot Be Defeated by Delay Tactics: Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Fast-Tracking of Cheque Bounce Case Framing Charges Under Section 193 IPC Without Following Section 340 CrPC is Illegal: Calcutta High Court Doctrine of Part Performance Under Section 53-A TPA Not Applicable Without Proof of Possession: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mere Allegations of False Implication Cannot Override Strong Forensic and Documentary Evidence: Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction in Elderly Woman’s Murder and Robbery Case Applicant Not a Sexual Predator, Relationship Was Consensual: Bombay High Court Grants Bail in POCSO Case Fraudulent Transfers to Evade Creditors Cannot Escape Scrutiny: Punjab & Haryana High Court Restores Execution Petition Gujarat High Court Rules That Contractual Employees Cannot Claim Regularization of Services Serious Charges and Victim’s Suicide Justify Continued Detention: Gauhati High Court Denies Bail in POCSO Case No Permanent Establishment in India, Rejects Notional Income Taxation: Delhi High Court Rules in Favor of Nokia OY Statutory Bail Under NDPS Act Can Be Denied If FSL Report Reaches Court Before Bail Plea": Calcutta High Court Termination After Acquittal is Unjust: Bombay High Court Quashes Dismissal of Shikshan Sevak, Orders 50% Back Wages Denial of MBBS Seat Due to Administrative Lapses is Unacceptable": Andhra Pradesh High Court Awards ₹7 Lakh Compensation to Wronged Student Sessions Court Cannot Reclassify Non-Bailable Offences While Granting Anticipatory Bail: Allahabad High Court

"Supreme Court Dismisses Special Leave Petitions, Upholds High Court's Decision to Grant Bail: 'The Interest of Justice Must Be Preserved'"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India dismissed the Special Leave Petitions filed by both the victim and the State/Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar Islands. The petitions challenged the Calcutta High Court's decision to grant bail to multiple accused in a criminal case involving serious offences under the Indian Penal Code.

Justice VIKRAM NATH and Justice AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH presided over the case and delivered the judgment. The Court stated, "The interest of justice must be preserved," thereby upholding the High Court's decision but imposing additional conditions on the accused.

The Calcutta High Court had granted bail to the accused for offences under Sections 376(D), 228A, 506, and 120B of the IPC. The High Court's decision was primarily based on the ground of parity as bail had been granted to the main accused, Jitendra Narain.

The Supreme Court agreed with the High Court's ultimate decision to grant bail but for entirely different reasons. "We do not find reason to interfere with the Impugned Judgments," the Court observed. However, it imposed additional conditions on the accused, including expeditious proceedings by the Trial Court and full cooperation from the accused during the trial.

The Court emphasized the importance of the victim's safety, stating, "The onus of ensuring their safety is on the Union Territory Administration." The Director-General of Police was directed to examine the victim's subsequent complaints and take appropriate action within ten days.

The Court referred to previous judgments outlining the factors to be considered while granting or refusing bail. These include the nature of the accusation, severity of the punishment, and the likelihood of the accused absconding.

The Special Leave Petitions were dismissed, and any pending applications were disposed of. The Court's decision serves as a significant precedent in cases involving the grant of bail for serious offences.

Date of Decision: August 24, 2023

XXX  vs UNION TERRITORY OF ANDAMAN  & NICOBAR ISLANDS & ANR. 

Similar News