The Supreme Court reminded the High Courts and the Sessions Courts not to be unduly swayed by submissions advanced by counsel on behalf of the accused in the nature of undertakings to keep in deposit/repay any amount while seeking bail in Cheating cases.
The Delhi High Court reprimanded the contention of the applicant stating that since the complainant was a lawyer and was, thus, well aware about nuances of writing a complaint and had, therefore, twisted the facts and police had lodged a false complaint against the applicant. It was opined that a person’s profession of being an advocate cannot be held against him.
The woman has alleged that she has been falsely implicated in a case of bigamy and cheating, on the basis of a clerical mistake committed by the Bank agent who mistakenly entered the name of her business partner as her husband and Nominee.
Kerala High Court: While adjudicating a question of law as to whether pre-arrest bail can be granted to an accused while he
Himachal Pradesh High Court: Vivek Singh Thakur, J., dismissed the petition and approved the prayer for custodial interrogation. The facts of the
“Inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or under Article 226 of the Constitution is designed to achieve salutary purpose that criminal proceedings ought not to be permitted to degenerate into weapon of harassment.”
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of Dr. DY Chandrachud*, Indu Malhotra and Indira Banerjee, JJ has held that there is no bar
Chhattisgarh High Court: A Division Bench of Prashant Kumar Mishra and Gautam Chourdiya, JJ., observed that, Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438
Kerala High Court: V.G. Arun J., while dismissing the present appeal clarified on the applicability of Section 438 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
Himachal Pradesh High Court: Anoop Chitkara J., considering the peculiar facts of the present case, allows anticipatory bail to a proclaimed offender,
Himachal Pradesh High Court: Anoop Chitkara, J. granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners and observed that the Court is under constitutional obligation
Kerala High Court: N. Anil Kumar, J. allowed this application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
Kerala High Court: B. Sudheendra Kumar, J. dismissed the anticipatory bail application of a person who was charged with offences of breach
Bombay High Court: S.S Shinde, J. dismissed a criminal application filed against the order of a Judicial Magistrate thereby issuing process against the
Allahabad High Court issued a notice requesting learned counsels to refer to the Code of Criminal Procedure (Uttar Pradesh Amendment) Act 2018
Patna High Court: A Full Bench of Hemant Kumar Srivastava, Aditya Kumar Trivedi and Ashutosh Kumar, JJ. refrained from adjudicating on the
In a recent press release, State of Uttar Pradesh announced the re-insertion of the provision of “Anticipatory Bail” in the State which
Kerala High Court: Raja Vijajayaraghavan, J. rejected an application for pre-arrest bail on the ground that victim was a minor girl. An
Kerala High Court: The Bench of Sunil Thomas, J. dismissed a bail application filed by an individual under Section 438 CrPC, for