Supreme Court of India Judgements

46420 Judgements hosted as on 27/04/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Bail Declined

Bail Declined

Murder of disabled person – Cancellation of Bail – – Accused is a person exercising significant political influence and that owing to the same, the informant found it difficult to get an FIR registered against him – That the accused was arrested only following a protest outside a police station demanding his arrest – Thus, the possibility of the accused threatening or otherwise influencing the witnesses, if on bail, cannot be ruled out

Jan 17, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MANOJ KUMAR KHOKHAR — Appellant Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Criminal…

Bail Declined

Cancellation of bail – Director of Prosecution in the administration of justice is crucial – He is appointed by the State Government in exercise of powers under Section 25A of the Code of Criminal Procedure – That his is a crucial role is evident from conditions such as in Section 25A (2) of the Code, which stipulates a minimum legal experience of not less than ten years for a person to be eligible to be Directorate of Prosecution and that such an appointment shall be made with the concurrence of the C J of the High Court – Appeal allowed.

Jan 15, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JAYABEN — Appellant Vs. TEJAS KANUBHAI ZALA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

Bail Declined

Murder – Cancellation of Bail – While considering an application for bail Courts cannot lose sight of the serious nature of the accusations against an accused and the facts that have a bearing in the case, particularly, when the accusations may not be false, frivolous or vexatious in nature but are supported by adequate material brought on record so as to enable a Court to arrive at a prima facie conclusion

Jan 2, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH BRIJMANI DEVI — Appellant Vs. PAPPU KUMAR AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. )…

Bail Declined

Though at the stage of granting bail a detailed examination of evidence and elaborate documentation of the merit of the case need not be undertaken, there is a need to indicate in such orders reasons for prima facie concluding why bail was being granted particularly where the accused is charged of having committed a serious offence. Any order devoid of such reasons would suffer from non-application of mind – not a fit case for grant bail.

Dec 12, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH LAXMAN PRASAD PANDEY — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and A.S.…

Bail Declined

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302 and 201 – Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – Sections 15A, 15A(3) and 15A(5) – Murder – Cancellation of bail – Notice issued to victim under sub-sections (3) and (5) of Section 15A are mandatory in nature – In the present case, it is evident that the right to notice and to be heard were violated -Bail cancelled – Appeal allowed.

Nov 4, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HARIRAM BHAMBHI — Appellant Vs. SATYANARAYAN AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

Bail Declined

Murder – Cancellation of bail – There is a specific allegation that the second respondent has actively aided the commission of the crime by furnishing information about the movements of the deceased to the killers – High Court has failed to notice relevant circumstances bearing on the seriousness and gravity of the crime and the role attributed to the second respondent – Bail cancelled – Appeal allowed.

Oct 31, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH  BHOOPENDRA SINGH — Appellant Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. )…

Bail Declined

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 438 – Anticipatory bail – Cancellation of – Murder – Order granting anticipatory bail has ignored material aspects, including the nature and gravity of the offence, and the specific allegations – Hence, a sufficient case has been made out for cancelling the anticipatory bail granted by the High Court – Impugned judgments of High Court granting anticipatory bail to second respondents in these appeals – are set aside – Appeals allowed.

Oct 11, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PRASHANT SINGH RAJPUT — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and B.V.…

Bail Declined

The directions issued had the potential for breaching the constitutional and legal rights of individuals who could be or are arraigned in criminal action and also put fetters on power of investigating agencies. Though the impact of the orders under appeal no more survives, we decided to express our opinion on the subject-controversy. With these observations, we allow the appeals. As both the applications for bail have been rejected, there is no necessity of formally setting aside the orders under appeal.

Oct 3, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and…

Bail Declined

(IPC) – S 302 and 120B – (CrPC) – Section 439 – Cancellation of Bail – Conspiracy – Murder – Tampering with evidence – Deceased was employed with the Intelligence Bureau – Mobile phone of the wife of the deceased was seized and it showed that she had been in constant touch with the First respondent-accused after the death of her husband – First respondent himself being an employee of the Anti-Corruption Bureau, the likelihood of the evidence being tampered with and of the witnesses being suborned cannot be discounted – surmise that the police had “developed a case” that Ketamine was administered, after four months of the incident – Conclusion that the High Court was in error in allowing the application for bail – Appeal allowed.

Oct 3, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHRI MAHADEV MEENA — Appellant Vs. PRAVEEN RATHORE AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and BV Nagarathna, JJ. )…

You missed

State Laws

Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 – The case involves the acceptance of Change Reports for the Vahiwatdar (Administrator) and Trustees of Shri Mallikarjun Devasthan, a Public Trust – The High Court invalidated the acceptance and remanded the matters for reconsideration – The main issue was the delay in filing the Change Report for the new Vahiwatdar of the Trust, which was submitted 17 years after the previous Vahiwatdar’s death – The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment, confirming the acceptance of Change Report Nos. 899 of 2015 and 1177 of 2017, allowing the civil appeals – The Court found that the delay in filing the Change Report was a curable defect and did not impact the legitimacy of the new Vahiwatdar’s assumption of office – The Court emphasized a liberal approach to condonation of delay, citing precedents.

Apr 28, 2024 sclaw
Service

Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 – Sections 7, 8 and 9 – Procedure for resignation by employees of private schools – The appellant challenged his termination from, which was set aside by the Tribunal but reinstated by the High Court – The main issues were whether the appellant’s resignation was lawfully withdrawn and if the documents related to his resignation were fabricated – The appellant argued that his resignation withdrawal was not considered and that the school committee’s resolutions were fabricated – The respondents contended that the resignation was accepted by the management committee and the school committee, and the appellant was informed accordingly – The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision, dismissing the appeal and affirming that the appellant’s resignation was voluntary and lawfully accepted – The Court found no evidence of fabricated documents and determined that the management committee’s acceptance of the resignation was valid – The Court referenced the MEPS Act and Rules, concluding that non-communication of resignation acceptance does not invalidate the termination – The Supreme Court concluded that the appellant’s resignation was accepted before his attempted withdrawal, and thus the termination was lawful.

Apr 28, 2024 sclaw
I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Section 5(7) – “financial creditor” – The appeals challenge judgments related to the status of certain creditors of M/s. Mount Shivalik Industries Limited under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) – The primary issue is whether the respondents are financial creditors or operational creditors within the meaning of the IBC – The appellants argue that the respondents are operational creditors, as the agreements indicate services rendered to promote the corporate debtor’s products – The respondents contend that the agreements were a means to raise finance, making them financial creditors due to the interest-bearing security deposits – The Court upheld the NCLAT’s decision, recognizing the respondents as financial creditors based on the commercial effect of the transactions – The Court examined the true nature of the transactions and found that the arrangements had the commercial effect of borrowing, satisfying the criteria for financial debt under the IBC – The Court applied the definition of financial debt and operational debt from the IBC, emphasizing the disbursal against the consideration for the time value of money – The appeals were dismissed, confirming the respondents’ status as financial creditors and allowing the resolution process to continue accordingly – The Court’s detailed analysis affirmed the NCLAT’s interpretation of the IBC provisions.

Apr 28, 2024 sclaw
Family Court I P C

“Husband Has No Right On Wife’s Stridhan” Matrimonial Law – The appeal concerns a matrimonial dispute involving misappropriation of gold jewellery and monetary gifts – The appellant, a widow, married the first respondent, a divorcee, and alleged misappropriation of her jewelry and money by the respondents – The core issue is whether the appellant established the misappropriation of her gold jewellery by the respondents and if the High Court erred in its judgment – The appellant claimed that her jewellery was taken under the pretext of safekeeping on her wedding night and misappropriated by the respondents to settle their financial liabilities – The respondents denied the allegations, stating no dowry was demanded and that the appellant had custody of her jewellery, which she took to her paternal home six days after the marriage – The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment, upheld the Family Court’s decree, and awarded the appellant Rs. 25,00,000 as compensation for her misappropriated stridhan – The Court found the High Court’s approach legally unsustainable, criticizing it for demanding a criminal standard of proof and basing findings on assumptions not supported by evidence – The Court emphasized the civil standard of proof as the balance of probabilities and noted that the appellant’s claim for return of stridhan does not require proof of acquisition – The Supreme Court concluded that the appellant had established a more probable case and directed the first respondent to pay the compensation within six months, with a 6% interest per annum in case of default.

Apr 28, 2024 sclaw