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

2023 Supreme(SC) 1095

C. T. RAVIKUMAR, SANJAY KUMAR
Virendra Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent


Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - (!) The Supreme Court held that granting bail in a heinous murder case based on irrelevant considerations amounts to arbitrary judicial discretion. - (!) The High Court’s order granting bail to the respondent No.2 was set aside; the appellant must surrender before the Trial Court by 16.10.2023, with bonds discharged on surrender. (!) (!) - (!) The appeal was allowed, and the order of the Allahabad High Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.53781 of 2022 was set aside. (!) - (!) The Court emphasized that post-mortem findings (12 ante-mortem injuries, all on the head) underscore the seriousness of the offense and the need to avoid arbitrary bail in such cases. (!) - (!) Registry is directed to communicate the order to the trial Court; pending applications are disposed of. (!) (!)

What is the guidance on bail in cases involving murder for the High Court and Supreme Court regarding irrelevant considerations?

What is required of a respondent granted bail in a heinous murder case when the appeal is allowed and bail is set aside?

What are the consequences and directions issued by the Supreme Court regarding surrender and custody if bail is set aside?


ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal is directed the judgment and order dated 03.02.2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.53781 of 2022 whereby the second respondent herein was enlarged on bail.

3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the standing counsel for the State of Uttar Pradesh and also the learned counsel for respondent No.2/accused No.5 in the chargesheet filed on completion of the investigation in F.I.R. No.47 of 2022 at Police Station Baluwa, District-Chandauli, Uttar Pradesh.

4. The appellant stands indicted for commission of offences under Sections 147, 148, 352, 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (I.P.C). He was arrested in connection with the crime on 29.03.2023. The impugned order was passed on 02.03.2023 on the application of respondent No.1/accused No.5 for regular bail. It is evident that respondent No.2 was granted bail assigning the reasons on the following lines:-

    “Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top