SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1992 Supreme(SC) 977

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.M. Ahmadi, K. Ramaswamy, JJ.
Smt. Subbulakshmi Jagadesan & Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu - Respondent
SLP(Crl) No. 706 of 1992, with SLP(Crl.) No. 828 of 1992 (V Ravinchandran vs T.N.) and (Crl. A. No. 200 of 1992 (S. Jagadesan vs Tamil Nadu).
Decided On : 20-8-1992

The court's decision to grant bail was based on the nature of allegations and witness statements.

Headnote:

Bail - Grant of Bail - Summary

Fact of the Case:

The court, after reviewing the charge-sheet and witness statements, granted bail to the petitioners with specific terms and conditions.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioners should be granted bail based on the nature of allegations and witness statements.

Issues: The issue was whether the petitioners should be granted bail based on the charge-sheet and witness statements.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the nature of allegations and witness statements, leading to the grant of bail with specific terms and conditions.

Final Decision: The petitioners were granted bail with specific terms and conditions, and the Criminal Appeal was dismissed as not pressed.

JUDGMENT :

S.L.P (Crl.) Nos.706 & 828 of 1992

1. Having heard counsel at length and having perused the charge-sheet filed by the prosecution showing the nature of allegations against the present petitioners, who are described as accused Nos.24, 25 and 26, and having also perused the statements of the relevant witnesses, who implicate them, we are of the opinion that the petitioners should be granted bail. They will be released on bail on the following terms and conditions;

(1) They shall execute a bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each with two sureties for like amount.

(2) They shall stay in their respective Taluks (Erode and Palayamkottai Taluks) except when they are required to attend the Designated Court. If they want to go out of their respective Taluks, they would be at liberty to do so after obtaining the written permission of the Superintendent of Police of the respective Districts.

(3) They will report before the Police at the Town Police Station once in 15 days.

2. The Special Leave Petitions will stand disposed of accordingly.

Criminal Appeal No.200/92

3. Now that the documents are given, the Criminal Appeal has become infructuous. Hence, counsel for the appellants does not press it. The Criminal Appeal is dismissed as not pressed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top