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 Grants Interim Bail to Teesta Setalvad: “Possession of Documentary Evidence and Completed Investigation” Key Factors, says the Bench*

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Supreme Court of India granted interim bail to Teesta Atul Setalvad in Criminal Appeal No(s). 2022/2023 (@ SLP (CRL) NO.8503/2023), challenging the High Court of Gujarat’s judgment that rejected her bail application. The Bench, comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.R. Gavai, Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.S. Bopanna, and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dipankar Datta, passed the verdict on July 19, 2023.

The Court emphasized that the possession of documentary evidence by the Investigating Agency and the completion of essential ingredients of the investigation were key factors in granting interim bail. The Bench noted that the alleged offences dated back to the year 2002, and the documentary evidence relied upon pertained to documents presented or used until the year 2012.

Court stated that “the essential ingredients of the investigation, including the custodial interrogation, had been completed,” making the relief of interim bail justifiable. The Court also took into consideration that the appellant was a lady and had been in custody since June 2022.

The Bench further clarified that the concern of the prosecution regarding the possibility of witness tampering could be addressed by directing the appellant not to make any attempt to influence witnesses. It emphasized that the observations made in the impugned order and their order would not influence the trial court at the stage of the trial.

The ruling reflects the Court’s cautious approach in not engaging in detailed elaboration of evidence at the pre-trial stage. The Bench refrained from delving into the issues raised in previous judgments and focused on the specific factors relevant to granting interim bail.

The Court’s decision comes after thorough consideration of the case, respecting the principles of judicial propriety and weighing the gravity of the offences. This landmark ruling has set a precedent for considering documentary evidence and completed investigation as crucial factors in determining interim bail applications in criminal cases.

The appellant’s advocate, Shri Kapil Sibal, expressed satisfaction with the judgment, stating, “The Court’s approach in assessing the possession of documentary evidence and the completion of investigation at the pre-trial stage is commendable. We are pleased with the decision to grant interim bail to our client.

On the other hand, Shri S.V. Raju, representing the State of Gujarat, argued that the appellant’s alleged attempt to implicate innocent citizens in serious offences warranted denial of bail. He maintained that the gravity of the offence and the potential to destabilize a democratically elected government should be significant considerations in bail applications.

Date of Decision: July 19, 2023

TEESTA ATUL SETALVAD vs STATE OF GUJARAT 

 

Similar News