The Supreme Court allowed withdrawal of an SLP seeking regular bail in an NDPS Act and Arms Act case after making sharp observations on the accused’s criminal antecedents during the hearing, remarking on the petitioner’s extensive criminal history before permitting withdrawal of the plea.
The Delhi High Court criticized the eight-month delay in registering an FIR in a dowry death case involving a 25-year-old woman who died within six months of marriage, emphasizing that allegations against the husband and in-laws required an immediate and effective investigative response.
The Supreme Court held that a coordinate bench of a High Court may revoke bail granted by another coordinate bench if it is shown that the accused secured bail by concealing or misrepresenting material facts. The ruling came in a case involving offences under the NDPS Act.
The Bombay High Court held that merely demanding repayment of a loan or following up with a borrower cannot amount to abetment of suicide. The Court clarified that Section 306 IPC requires clear evidence of intentional instigation, active encouragement, or conduct specifically intended to drive a person to take their own life.
The Karnataka High Court, while hearing a rape accused’s bail plea, expressed concern over rising serious crimes and diminishing fear of legal consequences. Justice R Nataraj stressed the need for stronger enforcement of criminal laws, observing that deterrence within the justice system appears to be weakening.
The Supreme Court awarded Rs 11 lakh compensation to a prisoner unlawfully kept in custody for 24 days beyond the legally permissible period, holding that wrongful deprivation of personal liberty constitutes a serious violation of Article 21 and undermines the constitutional guarantee of fundamental rights.
The Supreme Court directed expeditious trial in the 2023 Manipur ethnic violence cases and sought a status report, noting SIT chargesheets in 207 cases involving over 400 accused, while observing that bail cancellation requires egregious grounds and emphasising rehabilitation measures to uncover the complete truth.
The Supreme Court of India held that absence of an accused’s name in inquest proceedings alone cannot justify bail if investigation materials prima facie indicate involvement, while setting aside an Allahabad High Court order granting bail in a murder case.
The Supreme Court agreed to revisit the legal test for bail under the UAPA while hearing Umar Khalid’s case, sending the issue to a larger bench. The move comes amid conflicting rulings on bail standards in UAPA cases.
The Allahabad High Court held that a candidate facing serious criminal charges cannot be regarded as suitable for appointment to a disciplined force like civil police, even when pending cases truthfully disclosed in the application form.
