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

Supreme Court Emphasizes Distinction Between Civil and Criminal Disputes in Bail Applications: “Civil Disputes Should Not Be Converted Into Criminal Cases

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India today granted anticipatory bail to appellants Jay Shri and Hitesh Kela in a case involving allegations under Sections 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta presided over the case, highlighting crucial guidelines for bail applications and drawing a clear line between civil and criminal disputes.

The apex court, in its order, underscored the importance of distinguishing between civil disputes and criminal offences. The bench, referring to past judgments, stated, “Civil disputes should not be converted into criminal cases.” This observation aligns with the court’s longstanding caution against the misuse of criminal prosecution in matters that essentially fall within the ambit of civil disputes.

The appellants, implicated in an FIR registered at Police Station – Osiyan, District – Jodhpur Rural, Rajasthan, were accused of offenses punishable under Sections 420 (Cheating) and 120B (Criminal Conspiracy) of the IPC. The Supreme Court, in its order, noted, “Mere breach of contract does not amount to an offence under Section 420 or Section 406 of the IPC, unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown right at the beginning of the transaction.”

This judgment is seen as a reinforcement of the legal principle that anticipatory bail can be granted in cases where the dispute primarily stems from a civil matter, rather than a criminal one. The court directed that the appellants shall be released on bail if arrested, subject to conditions fixed by the trial court and compliance with conditions mentioned in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

The court further clarified that the observations made in the order are not to be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and shall have no bearing on any civil proceeding(s). This clarification aims to maintain the sanctity and independence of civil proceedings, irrespective of the criminal case outcomes.

Date of Decision: 19th January 2024

JAY SHRI & ANR.  VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN

 

Latest Legal News