Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal

Supreme Court Sets Aside Bail, Cites 'Error of Law' and 'Inadequate Reasoning'

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India delivered a landmark judgement, setting aside the bail granted to the respondents-accused in Criminal Appeal No. 2078 of 2023. The two-judge bench comprising Hon'ble Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Hon'ble Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra ruled that the High Court had erred in granting bail to the accused without adequate reasoning, which amounted to a "vice of non-application of mind."

The judgement, delivered on 24th July 2023, emphasized the importance of considering material aspects of the case while granting bail. The apex court highlighted that though detailed discussions on the merits of the case were not required during bail applications, the court must record adequate reasons to validate the grant of bail.

The bench stated, "While not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the prosecution has brought on record adequate material that would prima-facie point towards the guilt of the accused." The Court also underscored the need for balancing an individual's liberty with the seriousness of the allegations against them.

The impugned orders passed by the High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur on 14th February 2022 and 02nd February 2023 were criticized for being cryptic and casual in granting bail to the respondents-accused. The Court pointed out that the High Court did not consider vital aspects of the case, including the specific roles attributed to each accused in the alleged crime.

"The High Court referred only to the testimony of one hostile witness, and on that basis, exercised its discretion to grant bail in an erroneous manner," the judgement quoted. Consequently, the Supreme Court found the bail orders lacking adequate reasoning and set them aside.

In conclusion, the Court canceled the bail bonds of the respondents-accused and directed them to surrender before the concerned jail authorities within two weeks from the date of the judgement.

This ruling serves as a reminder to lower courts to exercise their discretion judiciously while granting bail and to ensure that bail orders are backed by adequate reasoning based on material aspects of the case.

Date of Decision: 24th July 2023

ROHIT BISHNOI vs THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.   

Latest Legal News