“One Cannot Apply For One Bail Order to All Subsequent Cases”: Supreme Court Dismisses Bail Applications in Multi-Jurisdictional Offences

Share:
ultra review complaint guidelines land age property Acquisition Developers firm Bail Marriage Property Town Eyewitness child Custody burden Reasonable LPG evidence Selection Police Jurisdiction Evidence FIR eyewitness Certificate Land Judges Sex property Lands Evidence Jail Lands Motor Accident Evidence Judgment property Constitutional Child Murder employee SUPREME COURT OF INDIA 1987 bail evidence claims pay diploma vidhan insurance magistrate 498 guilty 65 notice village ews guidelines Date of Decision: October 17, 2023 MRS. KALYANI RAJAN  vs INDRAPRASTHA medical APOLLO HOSPITAL  & ORS.          admission employers investigation judicial probationary mca tax kill bail liberty Police bail divorce certificate rape proper bail sexual violence acquittal police sale workers jurisdiction

In a significant ruling today, the Supreme Court of India dismissed the bail applications filed by accused nos. 5 and 6 in a case involving multiple offences and jurisdictions. The bench, comprising Justices A. S. Bopanna and M. M. Sundresh, emphasized that “one cannot apply one bail order to all other subsequent cases,” directing the applicants to approach jurisdictional courts for bail.

The accused had sought bail for offences under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978. The applications were filed in connection with FIR No. RC-BD1/2014E004-CBI/BS&FC/New Delhi and Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 326 of 2023. The applicants, being Directors at the relevant time, were implicated in a case where the amount siphoned off exceeds 40 thousand crores.

The applicants argued that they have been in jail for over seven years and acted in good faith. They also claimed that there was no evidence of tampering with witnesses or non-cooperation with the investigating agency. On the other hand, the Additional Solicitor General argued against bail, citing the large number of investors duped and the international scope of the financial trail.

The Court noted that the applicants had sought an “omnibus relief” by filing for bail in all pending cases across different jurisdictions and investigating agencies. The bench stated, “We are not willing to go into the merits of the submissions made as we are in agreement with the submissions made by the learned Additional Solicitor General that the applicants will have to approach the jurisdictional courts, instead of seeking an omnibus relief before this Court.”

The Court dismissed the bail applications and the writ petition but extended the interim bail granted to the applicants for a period of three months. This extension aims to facilitate the applicants in seeking bail from the jurisdictional courts. The Court made it clear that future applications for bail should be disposed of on their own merits, “without being influenced by this order.”

Date of Decision: September 5, 2023

PACL vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION      

 

Download Judgment

Share: