Home » Bail


Prashant Singh Rajput v. State of Madhya Pradesh

Anticipatory Bail – Cancellation of – Difference in the approach that the Court must adopt while considering a challenge to an order which has granted bail and an application for cancelling the bail granted – Explained. AIR 2021 SC 5004 : JT 2021 (10) SC 150 : 2021 (12) SCALE 214

Mahadev Meena v. Praveen Rathore

Bail – Claim of Parity – Bail was granted to the co-accused primarily and substantially on the ground that she had a child of eleven months with her in jail. This cannot be the basis to a claim of parity on the part of the other accused. The accused cannot claim parity with the co-accused since the allegations in the FIR and the material that has emerged from the investigation indicate that a major role has been attributed to him in the murder of the deceased. AIR 2021 SC 4547 : JT 2021 (9) SC 512

Yogesh v. State of U.P.

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 – Whether in a revision under Section 102 of the JJ Act, in a matter relating to consideration of bail to a ‘child in conflict with law’, the complainant/victim is to be afforded an opportunity of being heard ? Held, Complainant / Victim to be afforded opportunity of hearing before passing any order in a matter relating to bail of juvenile.

Union of India v. Md. Nawaz Khan

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 – Under Section 37(1)(b)(ii), the limitations on the grant of bail for offences punishable under Sections 19, 24 or 27A and also for offences involving a commercial quantity are : (i) The Prosecutor must be given an opportunity to oppose the application for bail; and (ii) There must exist ‘reasonable grounds to believe’ that (a) the person is not guilty of such an offence; and (b) he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. The standard prescribed for the grant of bail is ‘reasonable ground to believe’ that the person is not guilty of the offence.

Rahul R.U. v. State of Kerala, ICL 2021 (8) Ker. 912

  • Uncategorized

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 439 – Bail can be granted to the petitioner, if he is ready to deposit money or to furnish bank guarantee which is equal to half of the amount allegedly embezzled by him through the bank accounts of his wife and other close relatives.

Harjit Singh v. Inderpreet Singh @ Inder

Bail – As and when accused is granted bail, he came out of the jail, committed another offence and again went to jail – there is a high possibility of threat and danger to the life and safety of the complainant and his family members, as is evident from the criminal history of the accused – the High Court has erred in granting bail to accused. AIR 2021 SC 4017 : JT 2021 (8) SC 168 : 2021 (9) SCALE 651

Kanumuri Raghurama Krishnam Raju v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 439 – Bail – The jurisdiction of the Trial Court as well as the High Court under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is concurrent and merely because the High Court was approached by the accused without approaching the Trial Court would not mean that the High Court could not have considered the bail application of the accused. AIR 2021 SC 2827 : 2021 CriLJ 3154 : (2021) 6 SCC 732

Pawandeepsingh Mahendrasingh Kohli v. State of Maharashtra

Bail – Accused is in custody since 16.02.2016 and the allegations against him cannot be said to be standing on a higher pedestal than the allegations against the co-accused who was granted bail – the trial is not proceeded further and even the charges are yet to be framed – Bail granted. AIR 2021 SC 4319