Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Mere Entry, Abuse Or Assault Is Not Civil Contempt – Willfulness And Dispossession Must Be Clearly Proved: Bombay High Court Magistrate Cannot Shut Eyes To Final Report After Cognizance – Supplementary Report Must Be Judicially Considered Before Framing Charges: Allahabad High Court Examination-in-Chief Alone Cannot Sustain Conviction Amid Serious Doubts: Delhi High Court Upholds Acquittal in Grievous Hurt Case Employees Cannot Pick Favourable Terms and Reject the Rest: Bombay High Court Upholds SIDBI’s Cut-Off Date for Pension to CPF Optees Cannot Reclaim Absolute Ownership After Letting Your Declaration Suit Fail: AP High Court Enforces Finality in Partition Appeal Death Due to Fat Embolism and Delayed Treatment Is Not Culpable Homicide: Orissa High Court Converts 30-Year-Old 304 Part-I Conviction to Grievous Hurt Fabricated Lease Cannot Be Sanctified by Consolidation Entry: Orissa High Court Dismisses 36-Year-Old Second Appeal Rules of the Game Were Never Changed: Delhi High Court Upholds CSIR’s Power to Prescribe Minimum Threshold in CASE-2023 Resignation Does Not Forfeit Earned Pension: Calcutta High Court Declares Company Superannuation Benefit as ‘Wages’ Under Law Fraud Vitiates Everything—Stranger Can File Independent Suit Against Compromise Decree: Bombay High Court Refuses to Reject 49-Year-Old Challenge at Threshold Mere Long Possession By One Co-Owner Does Not Destroy The Co-Ownership Right Of The Other: Madras High Court State Cannot Hide Behind An Illegal Undertaking: Punjab & Haryana High Court Questions Denial Of Retrospective Regularization

Supreme Court Questions High Court's Reliance on Settlement for Offence Under Section 302 IPC – Bail Order Quashed

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


New Delhi, August 22, 2023 – The Supreme Court of India today set aside a Gujarat High Court order granting bail to an accused in a murder case, questioning the High Court's reliance on a settlement reached between the accused and the original complainant. The apex court also criticized the State for failing to present any 'special circumstances' against the accused, despite his criminal antecedents.

In a decisive judgment, the Supreme Court highlighted the procedural irregularities in the High Court's approach, specifically regarding the decision to grant anticipatory bail based on a settlement for an offence falling under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, which pertains to murder. "The reliance on a settlement between the accused and the original complainant for an offence under Section 302 of the IPC was notably irregular," the judgment read. [Para 1-5]

The apex court also took issue with the lack of 'special circumstances' presented by the State against the accused. "It is alarming that no special circumstances against the respondent were presented by the State, despite his criminal antecedents," the Court observed. [Para 9]

The judgment also emphasized the importance of personal liberty and cautioned courts to ordinarily grant bail, especially in serious cases involving offences carrying long sentences. [Para 10]

Ultimately, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's 'casual approach' in granting anticipatory bail. The accused was directed to surrender before the Court for regular bail proceedings. All courts and police authorities have been directed to strictly follow the law laid down in Arnesh Kumar and the directions in this latest judgment within a specified time frame. [Para 13]

Date of Decision: 22nd August, 2023

BHARWAD SANTOSHBHAI SONDABHAI       vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

Latest Legal News