SC finds fault in bail orders of two judges, sends them for training

Source: Times of India

SC has ordered sending an additional chief metropolitan magistrate (ACMM) and a sessions judge in Delhi for training to the judicial academy after finding fault in orders passed by the judicial officers. Bail was granted by ACMM to a habitual offender couple and the same was upheld by sessions judge. The SC clarified that it wasn't curbing pro-liberty principles but said the couple's conduct, overlooked by lower courts, made bail inappropriate.

To read more, please go to the following link:

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/sc-finds-fault-with-bail-orders-of-judges-sends-them-to-academy/articleshow/124220106.cms

Supreme Court slams GST defaulters' tactic to duck security amount for bail

Source: Times of India

Supreme Court on Monday criticized a strategy of GST defaulters who undertake before high courts to deposit a substantial sum as security to get bail and then attempt to escape the commitment by moving the apex court on the ground that the onerous bail conditions were contrary to SC's consistent rulings. To read more please go to the following link: 

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/sc-slams-gst-defaulters-bail-security-tactic-asks-madras-hc-to-consider-bail-plea-on-merit/articleshow/122036295.cms

Money Laundering Serious Offence, Courts Can't Grant Bail Casually Without Considering S.45 PMLA Conditions : Supreme Court

Source: Live Law

The Supreme Court today (February 13) set aside the bail granted to the individual accused of committing money laundering after noting that the High Court failed to satisfy the twin conditions stipulated under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (“PMLA”). To read more please go to the following link:

https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/money-laundering-serious-offence-courts-cant-grant-bail-casually-without-considering-s45-pmla-conditions-supreme-court-283896#:~:text=The%20Supreme%20Court%20today%20(February,2002%20(%E2%80%9CPMLA%E2%80%9D).

Why Supreme Court Ordered Retrospective Application Of Bail Provision Under BNSS

 Source: ABP - MSN

The Supreme Court in a recent development said that the that Section 479 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) which replaced the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) on July 1, will apply retrospectively. The Section 479 of BNSS deals with the release of undertrial prisoners on bail. It means that the provision will apply to all undertrials in cases was registered before July 1, 2024. To read more please go to the following link:

https://www.msn.com/en-in/autos/photos/why-supreme-court-ordered-retrospective-application-of-bail-provision-under-bnss/ar-AA1pqFso

Supreme Court: Incorrect to limit bail period if right to speedy trial violated

https://lawbeat.in/supreme-court-updates/limiting-bail-period-incorrect-if-hc-convinced-right-speedy-trial-violated-sc

Source: LawBeat 

SC to consider social media bar as bail rule

Source: Hindustan Times dated 12.07.2020

-- Murali Krishnan

Link to the article: https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/sc-to-consider-social-media-bar-as-bail-rule/story-eYTMgGV4BglqvEsfJifTAO.html

UP police had filed an FIR against Choudhary on April 11 for various offences under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including sedition (section 124A) and promoting enmity between religious groups (section 153-A), and Disaster Management Act.

The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to examine whether prohibition on use of social media can be prescribed as a pre-condition for granting bail.

A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice SA Bobde issued a notice to Uttar Pradesh government while refusing to interfere with an order passed by the Allahabad high court on May 20 which granted bail to Congress leader Sachin Choudhary on the condition that he will not use social media. “What is wrong with an order asking you not to use social media? We don’t think it’s too onerous if a person’s participation on social media creates mischief. Why can’t the court say you don’t use the instrument which was used to cause mischief,” the bench remarked.

UP police had filed an FIR against Choudhary on April 11 for various offences under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including sedition (section 124A) and promoting enmity between religious groups (section 153-A), and Disaster Management Act. The case was registered in connection with a press conference allegedly held by Choudhary in April questioning chief minister Yogi Adityanath’s handling of the pandemic.

The Allahabad high court released him on bail while setting a slew of conditions.

In his plea filed through advocate Keshav Ranjan, Choudhary maintained that he had only given a statement to media when they approached him. Choudhary also contested imposition of restrictions on use of social media as a condition for bail submitting that it is violative of freedom of speech under Article 19 of Constitution. The SC bench said that it will lay down a law regarding whether restrictions on social media can be imposed while granting bail.

Neighbour's affidavit amounts to tampering of evidence: Bombay high court

Source: Times of India dated 8th April 2013

The Bombay high court has said that an affidavit filed in favour of an accused by a neighbour in an anticipatory bail hearing "amounted to tampering with evidence". Justice Sadhana Jadhav said the "practice of filing such affidavits is deprecated as it hampers the process of investigation" and "amounts to tampering of evidence".

In February, after a woman hanged herself, the Kandivli police registered a case against her mother-in-law Sakuran Jamalluddin Gori (65) and a couple of other people for cruelty and abetment to suicide. Gori and her two sons moved the HC for pre-arrest bail. They were granted interim protection, but on April 5, the prosecutor said the post-mortem report, which was received later, revealed that there were injury marks, along with ligature marks, on the neck to indicate the woman was assaulted prior to her death.

Denying any assault, Gori's lawyer said the daughter-in-law had killed self as she "suffered from mental imbalance". To support the claim, he submitted an affidavit by a medical student, Shrirampal, a resident of the same building. The student said the inquest panchanama was conducted in her presence and the presence of a lady constable and that there were no injury marks on the body. The prosecutor said the medical student was not a state witness but had "participated in the proceedings only to protect the interest of the applicants". The HC agreed, but said "at this stage no action is being taken against Shrirampal as she happens to be a medical student with a bright career.''

Gori also denied the dowry accusations. Her lawyer said "it was not necessary for them to demand money from their daughter-in-law for a flat" as they are "financially strong and own five flats and four shops". On the mother-in-law's plea that she was old and ailing and with the two brothers-in-law offering to surrender, the HC granted her protection from arrest and dismissed the plea of the other two as withdrawn.