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

Supreme Court Grants Bail to Man After One Year in Jail, Bars Social Media Contact with Complainant

08 October 2024 10:32 AM

By: sayum


"Appellant Abhishek must not upload any photos of the complainant or contact her through any medium," ruled the Court, ensuring strict conditions during the bail period. "Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case including the period of incarceration suffered of nearly one year, we accept the present appeal and direct that the appellant Abhishek will be released on bail during the pendency of the trial."

Supreme Court of India delivered its judgment in the case of Abhishek vs The State of Madhya Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No. 910/2024). The case revolved around charges filed under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Information Technology Act, 2000. The Court allowed the appellant Abhishek's appeal for bail, setting aside the lower court's order.

The case originated from a First Information Report (FIR) filed on September 30, 2022, under Crime No. 449/2022. The allegations against Abhishek included offenses punishable under Sections 377 (unnatural offenses), 498A (cruelty by husband), 506 (criminal intimidation), and 34 (common intention) of the IPC, as well as Sections 66E and 67A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. These charges were filed following a marital dispute that arose after the appellant had filed for divorce. The complainant, who was known to the appellant before marriage, accused him of various offenses, including the misuse of electronic files, which Abhishek disputed.

The Court examined the legal question of whether the appellant, who had already spent nearly a year in incarceration, should be granted bail while the trial continued. The bench, comprising Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar, acknowledged the serious nature of the allegations but also took into account the length of the appellant’s imprisonment.

In addition to ordering bail, the Court emphasized strict conditions:

Abhishek must submit his passport to the trial court.

He is prohibited from leaving India without permission from the trial court.

He must provide his contact number to the Investigating Officer and ensure his availability during the trial.

Abhishek is barred from contacting the complainant or her family members, either physically or through social media.

He is forbidden from uploading or sharing any photographs of the complainant.

Conclusion and Impact

The Supreme Court granted Abhishek bail while clearly stating that its observations pertained only to the question of bail and would not influence the final determination of the case. The trial will proceed based on the evidence presented, ensuring a fair judicial process.

Date of Decision: October 1, 2024

Abhishek vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

 

Latest Legal News